Secretory Otitis Media: The Cantekin Affair
- Arnold S. Relman, MD
Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text.
Excerpt
To the Editor. —Dr Rennie's commentary on "The Cantekin Affair"1 raises interesting questions but, in my judgment, comes to dubious conclusions.
Should the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) have reviewed the first version of the manuscript by Cantekin et al?2 Rennie says yes, but in response to an inquiry I made immediately after receiving the Cantekin manuscript in 1987, officials at the University of Pittsburgh told me that Cantekin was under investigation for unprofessional conduct. Under the circumstances I had no choice but to decline any further consideration of Cantekin's manuscript. The decision by JAMA in 1988 to reject the same manuscript seems to have been based on similar considerations, so I don't see how Rennie can fault the NEJM without faulting his own journal as well.
Was it wise for JAMA to have decided to publish a revised version of the Cantekin manuscript more than 3
