CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smith, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Goodman, N. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smith, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Goodman, N. W.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 44, 9-13, Copyright © 1997 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

The hypertensive response to intubation. Do researchers acknowledge previous work?

AJ Smith and NW Goodman
University Department of Anaesthesia, Medical School Unit, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.

PURPOSE: To see whether investigators of a circumscribed research topic, the haemodynamic response to orotracheal intubation, review and cite previous work. A 1989 editorial about the response was critical to investigators for measuring physiology but not outcome; for nonetheless making recommendations; for studying only patients not at risk; and for implying patients are at risk when this is not certain. METHODS: A systemic Medline search was made for English language reports published during or after 1990, and their citation lists read for missed reports. All retrieved papers were read for citation of the editorial and for acknowledgement of its criticisms. Citations were tabulated, and cross-referenced between papers, to see whether blocks of citations had been obtained from other investigators' reports. RESULTS: Eighty-one full reports, from 48 groups of investigators, were obtained. The 1989 editorial was cited twice. All studies included physiological measurements, but none reported long-term outcome. There was no comment on the need to know outcome in 39 reports. Pre-existing risk factors were exclusions in 65 studies. In 56 papers, complications of the response were given as the reason for the study; in 41 of these papers only healthy subjects were studied. In total, 249 references about the response were identified from the 81 papers. There was no obvious evidence that citations were obtained from others' papers. CONCLUSION: Recognised deficiencies in research method were not acknowledged. When submitting work for publication, investigators should provide evidence of how they searched for previous work.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
M. Clarke and I. Chalmers
Discussion Sections in Reports of Controlled Trials Published in General Medical Journals: Islands in Search of Continents?
JAMA, July 15, 1998; 280(3): 280 - 282.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.