This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: In response to Drs Keim and Teich, we suggest that publication or rejection of trials in top medical journals may be more related to quality than publication bias against negative studies.¹ A number of published studies (21 to our knowledge) have reported alterations in established disease genes from various subgroups of patients with pancreatitis. Unfortunately, few investigators have applied the stringent criteria for idiopathic pancreatitis used in our study, and none have investigated the extended families of patients with seemingly sporadic trypsinogen mutations. Because this was the specific focus of our study, and because of the limit for references in our Research Letter, we restricted citations to the most relevant work for our report.

The suggestion by Keim and Teich that our results are due to inadequate history taking is unfounded since, in contrast with all prior studies, we obtained both clinical and genetic data from unaffected family . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLES

Idiopathic vs Hereditary Pancreatitis
Volker Keim and Niels Teich
JAMA. 2003;289(8):983-984.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Idiopathic vs Hereditary Pancreatitis
Jian-Min Chen and Claude Férec
JAMA. 2003;289(8):984-985.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Publication Bias in Editorial Decision Making
Carin M. Olson, Drummond Rennie, Deborah Cook, Kay Dickersin, Annette Flanagin, Joseph W. Hogan, Qi Zhu, Jennifer Reiling, and Brian Pace
JAMA. 2002;287(21):2825-2828.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT