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.
In reviewing the new edition of ‘Medicine and the
Internet’ Carnall is correct in supposing that an
important function of a book such as this is to describe
strategies for searching the Internet (three chapters are
specific to this topic, covering evidence-based
medicine, MEDLINE, directories and search engines).
However, in bemoaning the exclusion of several
obscure search engines Carnall overlooks another
important function - that of selectivity.
Currently Teoma (www.teoma.com) is in beta testing,
Daypop (www.daypop.com) is limited to searching for
news items, and Vivismo (www.vivismo.com) ‘has not
yet been developed’. Those of us writing books do not
have the same freedoms as online information
providers to frequently alter our content, and this is a
compelling reason why we must hedge our bets and
illuminate only those resources with substance (or
‘staying power’, pp.198). The longevity of a resource is
a noteworthy marker of quality often disregarded in
essays about the Internet - although being born in the
year dot(com) is not in itself a marker of quality! Nothing
would frustrate our readers more than a long catalogue
of Web site addresses, many of which were poorly
developed or already defunct. Similarly, Internet client
software undergoes constant evolution, making the
description of the peculiarities of a particular client a
futile exercise. There are few (if any) options other than
patient familiarisation with the software in front of you.
Being selective about what is or is not mentioned
makes for a concise book and contributes to the
longevity of the content within.
Proficient users readily forget how intimidating the
Internet can be to the uninitiated. Carnall’s assertion
that books are unlikely to ‘shortcut’ the process of
learning about the Internet is not entirely balanced. After
all, do we not facilitate our expertise in medicine by
readings books, or paper journals such as the BMJ?
Do we not draw reassurance from such published
guidance? But the point, perhaps, is that there is no
alternative to a ‘hands-on’ approach. Reading about
something is one thing; using it and acquiring practical
skills is an entirely different matter and in that I concede
any book can take us only so far.
Thus ‘Medicine and the Internet’, in common with all
Internet guides, won’t take the pain away entirely for
those dreading a relationship with the Internet. But it
will enrich the experience of those brave enough to cast
aside their reservations and embrace the Internet as
an enabling technology in medicine. For this reason
above all I am sure it will appeal to practising doctors -
not just to the technical people to whom it is
commended.
The Web page for this edition, soon with sample
chapters, is at:
We select; you practice
In reviewing the new edition of ‘Medicine and the
Internet’ Carnall is correct in supposing that an
important function of a book such as this is to describe
strategies for searching the Internet (three chapters are
specific to this topic, covering evidence-based
medicine, MEDLINE, directories and search engines).
However, in bemoaning the exclusion of several
obscure search engines Carnall overlooks another
important function - that of selectivity.
Currently Teoma (www.teoma.com) is in beta testing,
Daypop (www.daypop.com) is limited to searching for
news items, and Vivismo (www.vivismo.com) ‘has not
yet been developed’. Those of us writing books do not
have the same freedoms as online information
providers to frequently alter our content, and this is a
compelling reason why we must hedge our bets and
illuminate only those resources with substance (or
‘staying power’, pp.198). The longevity of a resource is
a noteworthy marker of quality often disregarded in
essays about the Internet - although being born in the
year dot(com) is not in itself a marker of quality! Nothing
would frustrate our readers more than a long catalogue
of Web site addresses, many of which were poorly
developed or already defunct. Similarly, Internet client
software undergoes constant evolution, making the
description of the peculiarities of a particular client a
futile exercise. There are few (if any) options other than
patient familiarisation with the software in front of you.
Being selective about what is or is not mentioned
makes for a concise book and contributes to the
longevity of the content within.
Proficient users readily forget how intimidating the
Internet can be to the uninitiated. Carnall’s assertion
that books are unlikely to ‘shortcut’ the process of
learning about the Internet is not entirely balanced. After
all, do we not facilitate our expertise in medicine by
readings books, or paper journals such as the BMJ?
Do we not draw reassurance from such published
guidance? But the point, perhaps, is that there is no
alternative to a ‘hands-on’ approach. Reading about
something is one thing; using it and acquiring practical
skills is an entirely different matter and in that I concede
any book can take us only so far.
Thus ‘Medicine and the Internet’, in common with all
Internet guides, won’t take the pain away entirely for
those dreading a relationship with the Internet. But it
will enrich the experience of those brave enough to cast
aside their reservations and embrace the Internet as
an enabling technology in medicine. For this reason
above all I am sure it will appeal to practising doctors -
not just to the technical people to whom it is
commended.
The Web page for this edition, soon with sample
chapters, is at:
http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-851063-2
Competing interests: No competing interests