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  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Frank Cole, MD

JAMA. 1977;237(21):2327.

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

Recently I read two articles that dealt with selection of anesthesia for one particular operation; each author called his system "the method of choice." The two methods were different: one author prescribed three or four agents; the other, five. I have done the same thing (just as well, I think) with one or two agents.

Why each author called his technique a "method of choice" was hazy; both claimed to provide good operating conditions, and that was all. Neither paper offered statistical comparisons with other methods or counting of cases; nothing that might have been measured was measured. Clearly, the words "method of choice" had no justification, serving only to irritate the reader.

There are few methods of choice, unless laid down in documented studies by serious workers. The use of the words "method of choice" without statistical study and proved significance, and without justification, is deplorable. All too often, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Editor, Nebraska Medical Journal Lincoln

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?