Responses

Download PDFPDF
BET 2: Which intraosseous device is best in the prehospital setting?
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. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed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:
    Best BETS: A further call for scrutiny.

    Dear Sirs,

    We have previously expressed concerns about the validity of the "clinical bottom line" published alongside the popular Best BETS. (1) Best BETS should be based on specific clinical scenarios and should aim to provide a clinical bottom line which indicates, in the light of the evidence, what the clinician would do if faced with the same scenario again. (2) The report by Olaussen and Williams serves to...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.