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?

John M. DiMichele, MD
Lahey-Hitchcock Clinic St Johnsbury, Vt

JAMA. 1997;277(10):787.

	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.

—The article by Dr Grossman and colleagues¹ raises a critical issue that all physicians must face in sciencebased practice: are we basing our clinical and therapeutic decisions on our best sound logic and proven fact? The issue becomes especially critical when the risks of our actions might become life-threatening.

However, I pause at the conclusion that we must abandon outright the practice of using nifedipine for the treatment of hypertensive emergencies. The authors cite the lack of data proving the benefit of this intervention, but lack of data is not equivalent to negative data. Is not the decision to abandon a practice based on the absence of data proving its benefit equivalent to endorsing a practice without supporting data? Significant morbidity is often an acceptable cost if we know that the therapeutic risk is outweighed by the benefit of therapy. Of note, both deaths reported secondary . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Margaret A. Winker, MD, Senior Editor, and Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, Senior Editor.

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