Re: Three week versus six week immobilisation for stable Weber B type ankle fractures: randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority clinical trial
Not my area of expertise but, as I am moving into an age group where fractures are more likely, I read it with interest. I was, however, struck by the double negative used in the conclusion - "X .... was non-inferior to ...Y". This is really not clear English and not easy to read quickly. What is wrong with "X was ...... just as good as ....Y"? I don't blame the authors - their English is clearly superior to my Finnish, but I would expect the BMJ editors to pick up on this sort of thing.
Competing interests: No competing interests