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.
N Manassiev (1) is perhaps wrong to criticize rapid responses. These
may not always be neat and pristine, but they would seem very democratic.
Scientists can tend to be an off- putting elite, a baffling priesthood.
Many people often feel they are not being given a voice in medical debate.
Rapid responses are a potentially untidy forum where all sorts of
individuals- ordinary GPs, even mere patients such as myself-trespass upon
the Temple of Research. The results are bound to be ragged and
unpredictable, as with radio phone-ins, yet any journal will stagnate if
it does not permit free and equal discussion.
REFERENCES:
(1) Pico research for pico doctors. N. Manassiev. BMJ 2009;339:b3631.
Dr Manassiev derides rapid response posting as "resembling radio
phone-ins , where people take up time without having much to say".I wonder
if he includes himself in this definition as I see he has made 10 rapid
responses on various topics according to the BMJ search-engine.Presumably
these are exceptions to the rule.
Just to clarify some basic science - he implies that nano is smaller
than pico.Wrong way round ; though the femto he correctly implies is a
thousandth of a pico.
I think it is important that we have a sound grasp of SI units is we use
them;I would rather have a nano-brain that a pico-brain .
Democracy tends to be untidy
N Manassiev (1) is perhaps wrong to criticize rapid responses. These
may not always be neat and pristine, but they would seem very democratic.
Scientists can tend to be an off- putting elite, a baffling priesthood.
Many people often feel they are not being given a voice in medical debate.
Rapid responses are a potentially untidy forum where all sorts of
individuals- ordinary GPs, even mere patients such as myself-trespass upon
the Temple of Research. The results are bound to be ragged and
unpredictable, as with radio phone-ins, yet any journal will stagnate if
it does not permit free and equal discussion.
REFERENCES:
(1) Pico research for pico doctors. N. Manassiev. BMJ 2009;339:b3631.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests