 |
 |
***cross-posted***
Hello, everyone. I had been looking for a good example
to show my students why it’s important to look at the linked Comments
(letters to the editor) that one finds associated with some PubMed articles. Here’s
a nifty one I just found:
Original article:
Spira M. Otoplasty: what I do now--a 30-year perspective.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999 Sep;104(3):834-40; discussion 841.
PMID: 10456539
Comment (with illustrative photos, drawings, & text
descriptions):
Corchado C, Infante J. A surgical technique for the
correction of all types of prominent ears?
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000 Sep;106(4):948-51. No abstract
available. PMID: 11007419
Here’s the example I do for Erratums; I don’t
know how serious the dosage error is, but at least this illustrates the
importance of always looking up the Erratum.
Original article:
Dupuis LL, Najdova M, Saunders EF. Retrospective appraisal
of busulfan dose adjustment in children.
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000 Dec;26(11):1143-7. Erratum in:
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003 Apr;31(8):729.
PMID: 11149723
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=11149723%5BUID%5D
Erratum (dosage in article was reported as 4 times higher
than actually administered):
Dupuis LL, Najdova M, Saunders EF. Retrospective appraisal
of busulfan dose adjustment in children.
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003 Apr;31(8):729. PMID:
12692614
Please feel free to post this.
Take care,
Tanya
Tanya Feddern, MLIS, AHIP, MOT, OTR/L
http://www.geocities.com/nqiya/EBMbib.html
http://www.geocities.com/nqiya/index.html
Evidence-Based Medicine Assistant Professor;
Reference & Education Services Librarian
University of