Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Mark Petticrew brilliantly examines eight common myths about
systematic reviews [1]. It seems that he has forgotten to examine another
myth: medicine based on systematic reviews would be inhuman because it
would be too scientific [2]. To this myth, couldn’t it be answered that in
competent doctors, scientific qualities do not replace, but are associated
with, human qualities? [3]
[1] Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths
and misconceptions BMJ 2001;322:98-101 (13 January).
[2] O'Donnell M. Evidence-based illiteracy: time to rescue "the
literature". Lancet 2000;355:48991.
[3] Watine J, Borgstein J. Evidence-based illiteracy or illiterate
evidence. Lancet 2000;356:684.
Inhuman systematic reviews?
Mark Petticrew brilliantly examines eight common myths about
systematic reviews [1]. It seems that he has forgotten to examine another
myth: medicine based on systematic reviews would be inhuman because it
would be too scientific [2]. To this myth, couldn’t it be answered that in
competent doctors, scientific qualities do not replace, but are associated
with, human qualities? [3]
[1] Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths
and misconceptions BMJ 2001;322:98-101 (13 January).
[2] O'Donnell M. Evidence-based illiteracy: time to rescue "the
literature". Lancet 2000;355:48991.
[3] Watine J, Borgstein J. Evidence-based illiteracy or illiterate
evidence. Lancet 2000;356:684.
Competing interests: No competing interests