Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 29 April 2016
- Published on: 29 April 2016
- Published on: 29 April 2016Are BETs best?Show More
Dear Editor
I would like to thank the editors of the EMJ for their replies to the points raised by myself and Dr Webster, however these replies have themselves highlighted further concerns [1][2].
It is clear that considerable effort goes into producing the BETs but as Mr Mackway-Jones states, BETs do not represent the highest level of evidence. Might it not be better to coordinate this effort to produc...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 29 April 2016Best Bets, how robust is the review process?Show More
Dear Editor
The correspondence between Professor Mackway Jones [1] and Dr Locker et al.[2] and Dr Webster [3] raises some interesting points about how Best Bets are developed.
Best Bets represent an admirable attempt to improve the evidence on which our practice is based and no one should underestimate the hours of work that go into this. Of course, the biggest problem for Best Bets is that the answer...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.