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.
Delamothe sounds optimistic about openness, transparency etc in the
in the fields of clinical trials. How about this? There was an
advertisement in our local paper asking the public to participate in "A 6
months research study... evaluating a new generation of insulin (sic) to
see if it can provide more consistent blood sugar control in people with
type 2 diabetes." In view of the recent reports on possible adverse
effects of insulin treatment in this group I thought it would be
interesting to see how this issue was approached and I telephoned the
contact number. This turned out to belong to Novo-Nordisk. The operator
was unable to let me have the address or put me through to anyone able to
discuss the matter. I was unwilling to pose as a potential volunteer or
pretend to be asking on someone else's behalf.
The clinical trials division of the MHRA was "unable to provide
information on Novo-Nordisk research protocols." Various other bodies
showed a similar lack of interest, but I am pursuing some possible
avenues.
Does anyone know how to obtain this sort of information which is vital to
have when asked to advise by potential volunteers?
Not everything in the garden is lovely
Delamothe sounds optimistic about openness, transparency etc in the
in the fields of clinical trials. How about this? There was an
advertisement in our local paper asking the public to participate in "A 6
months research study... evaluating a new generation of insulin (sic) to
see if it can provide more consistent blood sugar control in people with
type 2 diabetes." In view of the recent reports on possible adverse
effects of insulin treatment in this group I thought it would be
interesting to see how this issue was approached and I telephoned the
contact number. This turned out to belong to Novo-Nordisk. The operator
was unable to let me have the address or put me through to anyone able to
discuss the matter. I was unwilling to pose as a potential volunteer or
pretend to be asking on someone else's behalf.
The clinical trials division of the MHRA was "unable to provide
information on Novo-Nordisk research protocols." Various other bodies
showed a similar lack of interest, but I am pursuing some possible
avenues.
Does anyone know how to obtain this sort of information which is vital to
have when asked to advise by potential volunteers?
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests