BMJ  2008;336 (10 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.39574.574676.47

Editor's Choice

Editor’s Choice

What our advisory board can, and can’t, tell us

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Since the BMJ set up its editorial advisory board in 1997, a rolling cast of medicine’s finest has been on hand to support and challenge the journal (http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/about-bmj/editorial-advisory-board). Each year when we gather in London for the annual meeting, as we did last week, the personalities, expertise, and advice are subtly different. This year for the first time, the meeting included editors in chief of the BMJ’s 26 sister journals (http://group.bmj.com/products/journals), bringing not only knowledge of their own discipline but an instinct for what journals can and can’t do.

The discussion was as inspiring and wide ranging as ever: the global food crisis; the loss of one to one personal care in general practice; the "procedurisation" of secondary care, with specialists being asked to operate on patients they haven’t seen before; the need to rethink medical ethics, which has become too bound up with the . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Beware of self selection and self fulfilling prophecy

Peter D Singleton
BMJ 2008 336: 1034. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

US medical schools should say no to pharma support

Janice Hopkins Tanne
BMJ 2008 336: 1035. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Personal electronic health records: MySpace or HealthSpace?

Michael R Kidd
BMJ 2008 336: 1029-1030. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]