Users' guide to detecting misleading claims in research: Discussion section helps redress the balance

doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7483.145-a

From trainee to consultant, BMJ Group offers doctors around the world tailored information, special events, learning resources and recruitment services at every step along their career path.

... by doctors, for doctors, for patients
We are open for entries!

Online learning

BMJ Learning

High-quality CME / CPD for doctors and other healthcare professionals. BMJ Learning features hundreds of accredited, peer-reviewed learning modules in text, video, and audio formats. Find out more

Courses and Qualifications

BMJ Masterclasses

BMJ Masterclasses, led by experts, help clinicians to use the latest evidence and recent guidelines in practice and meet their CPD/CME requirements. Find out more

Exam Preparation

The leading provider of online exam preparation, helping over 167,000 healthcare professionals to pass their exams. Find out more

onExamination

Search all BMJ comment articles:

From

Limit by

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

S Anuradha, master of public health student (sanuradha@ntlworld.com)

Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN

EDITOR—Montori et al produce a users' guide to detecting misleading claims in reports of clinical research.1 In the previous letter Penston raises objections to the proposal to read only the methods and results section and to …