Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
I read David's article with interest and decided to find the
manuscript he cited only to find that his reference was incorrect. The
Cancer (2002); 94:3135-3141 article is as follows (taken directly from the
Table of Contents):
3135-3140 7-hydroxytryptophan, a novel, specific, cytotoxic agent
for carcinoids and other serotonin-producing tumors
Diego J. Walther, Jens-Uwe Peter, Michael Bader
I believe the manuscript that was refered to, in David's article, was
the following:
Sinha AA, Quast BJ, Wilson MJ, Fernandes ET, Reddy PK, Ewing SL,
Sloane BF, Gleason DF
Ratio of cathepsin B to stefin A identifies heterogeneity within Gleason
histologic scores for human prostate cancer.
Prostate. 2001 Sep 15;48(4):274-84
The incorrect citation of articles is an increasing trend in news
reports, as well as, manuscripts themselves. Authors should take more
time to ensure that the information they pass on is both accurate and
timely, however, blame should also be shared by editors. While computers
and the introduction of electronic databases have made the preparation of
manuscripts much easier, it has also made us less likely to ensure the
accuracy of our references. This complacency needs to end!
Regrads,
Sean R. Downing
Competing interests:
No competing interests
09 July 2002
Sean R Downing
Research Fellow
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Binney Street, Boston, MA 02115
Getting the citations right
I read David's article with interest and decided to find the
manuscript he cited only to find that his reference was incorrect. The
Cancer (2002); 94:3135-3141 article is as follows (taken directly from the
Table of Contents):
3135-3140 7-hydroxytryptophan, a novel, specific, cytotoxic agent
for carcinoids and other serotonin-producing tumors
Diego J. Walther, Jens-Uwe Peter, Michael Bader
I believe the manuscript that was refered to, in David's article, was
the following:
Sinha AA, Quast BJ, Wilson MJ, Fernandes ET, Reddy PK, Ewing SL,
Sloane BF, Gleason DF
Ratio of cathepsin B to stefin A identifies heterogeneity within Gleason
histologic scores for human prostate cancer.
Prostate. 2001 Sep 15;48(4):274-84
The incorrect citation of articles is an increasing trend in news
reports, as well as, manuscripts themselves. Authors should take more
time to ensure that the information they pass on is both accurate and
timely, however, blame should also be shared by editors. While computers
and the introduction of electronic databases have made the preparation of
manuscripts much easier, it has also made us less likely to ensure the
accuracy of our references. This complacency needs to end!
Regrads,
Sean R. Downing
Competing interests: No competing interests