eLetters

498 e-Letters

published between 2002 and 2005

  • The "technique" of allocation concealment?
    Vance W Berger

    Dear Editor,

    In the recent piece “Evidence-Based Child Health 2: Understanding Randomized Controlled Trials”, Akobeng demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding which has caused some of the advice given to be misleading and incorrect. Moreover, this misunderstanding has been adequately covered in the literature, and so a more diligent search would have prevented the error. Instead, your readers are now being told...

    Show More
  • Incomplete Kawasaki disease – Not to be forgotten
    Anjum Gandhi

    Dear Editor,

    Drs Sinha and Balakumar have provided a reminder of BCG scar reactivation as a diagnostic marker of Kawasaki disease (KD). This potentially serious disease has no definitive diagnostic test and it is not unusual for the diagnosis to be delayed. The authors also alluded to incomplete KD, of which there is increasing recognition and which may be associated with a higher chance of cardiac complications....

    Show More
  • Ambulatory multidisciplinary treatment of children with diabetes
    Zvi Laron

    Dear Editor,

    I read with great interest and satisfaction the following two articles in your journal: Lowes and Gregory – “Management of newly diagnosed diabetes: home or hospital?”[1]; and McEvilly and Kirk – “Twenty years of a multidisciplinary paediatric diabetes home care unit”.[2] Indeed the need to admit newly diagnosed children and adolescents to a hospital can be markedly reduced and even avoided.

    ...

    Show More
  • Re: The implications of the David Glass case for future clinical practice in the UK
    Charles Essex

    Dear Editor,

    Hindsight is both a wonderful and a dreadful thing. Although outside the scope of Elias-Jones and Samanta's article, was David's tonsillectomy necessary in the first place [for "noisy and laboured breathing"]? Have those who made the referral and who agreed to carry out the operation reviewed whether it was the right thing to do? Were the referral and operation done because of pressure from, for exampl...

    Show More
  • Prescribing errors rampant in developing countries
    Vijayashankara Nanjegowda

    Dear Editor,

    The article by Walsh et al. is timely. It is time for all practicing paediatricians and the general practitioners in developing countries like India, to wake up to reality of prescribing drugs. The rational prescribing will definitely prevent the unnecessary morbidity and sometimes the fatal adverse reactions.

    In India it is common to see the long prescriptions. The prescription contains a d...

    Show More
  • Response to Charles Essex
    Harvey Marcovitch

    When the paper was first submitted it did not identify the patient's name or address nor where she was treated. Unfortunately I did not think to seek information on the treating team from the subscriber to ADC who submitted it on the family's behalf. I have checked the audit trail and remain uncertain as to how the acknowledgement found its way in - but I take full responsibility and apologise to anyone who feels bruised...

    Show More
  • First, do no harm
    Minoo Irani

    Dear Editor,

    The article by Dr Datta and colleagues makes interesting reading. The importance of optimal neuroimaging and accurate interpretation of scans is correctly emphasised. Their first recommendation about neuroimaging in all suspected cases of non-accidental head injury (NAHI)is welcome and the point about MRI as a second line investigation contributing to prognostication in these cases has some evidence bas...

    Show More
  • Screening for colour vision defects is important
    Alex Henderson

    Dear Editor,

    Cumberland, Rahi, and Peckham[1] argue that there is little to be gained by continuing with existing school screening programmes for colour vision defects (CVD) whose primary purpose is to advise affected children against certain careers.

    I agree that current blanket bans on those with CVD fail to take account of variability of both the genotype and phenotype of the condition.[2] Screening p...

    Show More
  • More is not necessarily better
    Charles Essex

    Dear Editor,

    Frances’s story raises several points. Firstly, I am sure I am not alone among readers in having every sympathy with Frances's mother and grandmother. I find it is a Canute-like task trying to stem the flood of expectation among professionals and parents that “more must be better”. There is an erroneous belief that more investigations, more professionals involved, more interventions, more physiotherap...

    Show More
  • Too much ado for what?
    Lucio Piermarini

    Dear Editor,

    Any additional evidence of uselessness of skull x-ray following head injury is welcome, but not at all if that means an increase in radiation exposure in single children owing to an excess in CT scans. The expected result should have been less CTs, at least the ones induced by the finding of harmless skull linear fractures. The same the guidelines (apart from skull x-ray, proved useless) in the two co...

    Show More

Pages