To question or not to question?

Birth

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 223-224

  Young, Diony ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGER; BABY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EDITORIAL; EXAMINATION; HEALTH; IMAGINATION; LAW SUIT; MOTHER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH; STANDARD; THREAT;

CLINICAL TRIALS; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; PUBLISHING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 0036435656     PISSN: 07307659     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-536X.2002.00197.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (8)

1. Grant JM. Editor's choice: Medicine as ritual. BJOG 2002;109:i-iii.
2. Hodnett E, Hannah ME, for the Term Breech Trial Steering Committee. Term breech trial (letter). Birth 2002;29:217-219.
3. Keirse MJNC. Reply: Term breech trial (letter). Birth 2002;29:219-220.
4. Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hellman J, et al, and the Canadian Multicenter Post-Term Pregnancy Trial Group. Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial. N Engl J Med 1992;326:1587-1592.
5. Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR, for the Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: A randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2000;356:1375-1383.
6. Keirse MJNC. Evidence-based childbirth only for breech babies? Birth 2002;29:55-59.
7. Menticoglou SM, Hall PF. Routine induction of labour at 42 weeks gestation: Nonsensus consensus. BJOG 2002;109:485-491.
8. van Roosmalen J, Rosendaal F. There is still room for disagreement about vaginal delivery of breech infants at term. BJOG 2002;109:967-969.