TY - JOUR T1 - BestBETs reply from the BestBETs group JF - Emergency Medicine Journal JO - Emerg Med J SP - 523 LP - 523 VL - 21 IS - 4 AU - K Mackway-Jones Y1 - 2004/07/01 UR - http://emj.bmj.com/content/21/4/523.1.abstract N2 - Two critical letters from the Sheffield Deanery have been posted on the EMJ online web site. The first was written about a particular BET (vasopressin versus adrenaline (epinephrine) in cardiac arrest) and challenged the completeness of the search—claiming that a brief search of Medline had uncovered recent reviews that had been missed. It also called into question the whole peer review process for BETs. The letter was erroneous, and a robust defence of the search and selection strategy for the BET in question was posted by the author (Kerstin Hogg) pointing out that finding papers was a first step and that the alleged “missed” papers had in fact been found and added nothing in that they had found no additional primary papers. The issue of the peer review process was left as the argument that the review process for this BET had failed (which underlay the complaint) had been disproved. Dr Webster raises a number of … ER -