Surveys show that many ophthalmologists now include non-peer-reviewed communications in their reading. These communications, both in newspaper (tabloid) and journal format, convey various types of information. Although I don’t prefer the term throwawaysfor such publications, many physicians employ this designation. We wish to remind the reader that such publications do not always distinguish scientific fact and informed judgment from extemporaneous clinical opinion and anecdotal observation. The blurring of this distinction is important; most readers expect the written word that appears in a scientific format to have been previously screened for merit. Most readers expect this screening to have been performed by scientific or clinical peers under the direction of a responsible editorial board. We expect this because, during the decade of our training as physicians and ophthalmologists, we have learned to trust such carefully reviewed publications as the New England Journal of Medicinethe Archives of Ophthalmology, and the.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||2|
|Journal||Archives of ophthalmology|
|State||Published - Nov 1985|
ASJC Scopus subject areas