Ajit N. Babu, MBBS, MPH; Sharon M. Carpenter Fryer, MS, RD; Steven M. Kymes, PhD, MHA
The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:
•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references
•Type with double-spacing
•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.
Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.
Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.
Babu AN, Carpenter Fryer SM, Kymes SM. Eponyms and the Diagnosis of Aortic Regurgitation. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:583-584. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-140-7-200404060-00034
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(7):583-584.
We agree with Dr. Dermksian that the statement in question was imprecise and could have been more clearly written, as follows: “A recent investigation found that patients with aortic regurgitation had increased amplitude of the pulse, lower mean arterial pressure, and a greater narrowing of pulse pressure on wrist elevation than normal patients.” We are grateful to him for pointing out this discrepancy and also for his kind comments about our paper as a whole.
Dr. Atkuri and colleagues question the lack of likelihood ratios in our review. It is true that likelihood ratios (which are calculated from sensitivity and specificity) can add valuable information to reports of diagnostic accuracy (1, 2). As we described at length, the vast majority of studies we found relating to the eponymous signs were of low quality and had imprecise estimates of accuracy. It was our view that reporting likelihood ratios generated by using sensitivity and specificity statistics from studies of such questionable quality would be misleading, and therefore we chose not to do so.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only