This Article  • References  • 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?

H. David Banta, MD, MPH
Office of Technology Assessment Congress of the United States Washington, DC

Stephen B. Thacker, MD
Centers for Disease Control Atlanta

JAMA. 1981;245(15):1525-1526.

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

To the Editor.—

We are writing in reference to the SPECIAL COMMUNICATION, "Impact of Electronic Fetal Monitoring on Obstetric Management" by Orvan W. Hess, MD (1980;244:682). Dr Hess' review is incomplete and biased, as well as inaccurate in some instances, recurrently demonstrating his position as an advocate of universal electronic fetal monitoring (EFM). It is difficult, for example, to understand why he omitted results from three of the four randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of EFM.^1-3 He also inappropriately labeled Dr Wennberg's study an RCT (Dr Hess' reference 15).

Dr Hess alludes to our work several times but fails to reference articles that appear in the scientific literature.^4-6 We think that it is only fair to offer readers the opportunity to judge what we have written and draw their own conclusions.

After thorough review of the issues involved in EFM, we concur with the conclusion of the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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