Download PDFPDF

Skull fracture and intracranial injury in children
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: The subjective nature of BETs

    Dear Editor

    The Best Evidence Topic published in November 2001 on absence of skull fracture failing to predict intra-cranial injury (ICI) as determined by head CT (HCT)[1] has provoked criticism on the methods used to find a clinical bottom line.

    Dr Geggie states that he produced a BET on the topic that appears not to contradict the findings of the published result, but that there is perhaps an unaccept...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    The Subjective Nature of BETs

    Dear Editor,

    I am an avid reader of your Best Evidence Topic reports (BETS) section. In your November issue I was particularly interested to read the BET by Andrew Munroe on skull fractures and intracranial injury – particularly as I had recently presented a BET on the same subject in October.

    There were several striking differences between my BET and the one published in November. In particular I fin...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.