Letters: In response...

Author's Response Letters to the Editor

Sir—Our aim was to start a debate and to encourage an appropriate body to act. Gallacher’s letter is therefore most appreciated. The starting point is that much good work in developing questionnaires is wasted. Too often, mistakes are repeated and we lack agreed standards for validating questionnaires. Existing questionnaires are not always readily available and the protocol for their use is no...

Author's response to self-directed learning letters.

To the Editor: I thank Drs Guglielmino, Bulik, and Shokar for their reactions 1,2 to my commentary 3 on self-directed learning (SDL). In spite of what seems to have been the perception of these authors, however, my initial commentary was not so much a critique of the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) as a strong encouragement to explore avenues of research beyond it. Since the SDLR...

Looking Beyond FDA Warning Letters to Explore Unforeseen Trouble Spots in eDTCA: A Response to Recent Commentaries

Letters, we've got letters...

So, you want to write a letter to the editor? A recent editorial by Golub in JAMA prompted us to outline more fully our vision of Annals of Emergency Medicine’s Correspondence section and its place within the journal and the peer review process. Like most peer-reviewed publications, Annals of Emergency Medicine contains a correspondence section, commonly known as Letters to the Editor. Journals...

Letters Letters n Editor:

“Fronti Nulla Fides”: No reliance can be placed on appearance. In a letter to the editor (AI Mugazine, Winter 1989), Benjamin Kuipers criticizes various points made in an earlier paper of ours (Akman and ten Hagen 1989). First, a side (nonetheless important) remark: Although Kuipers asserts that he distributes QSIM to interested researchers, our experience has been otherwise. Akman has tried tw...