Difficult airway research options and ethical consensus – a reply

Anaesthesia

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 542-543

  Irwin, M G ^a   Ward, P A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; HEURISTICS; HUMAN; LETTER; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; RESPIRATORY TRACT DISEASE; SEMANTICS; SOCIAL MEDIA; RESPIRATION CONTROL; RESPIRATORY SYSTEM;

AIRWAY MANAGEMENT; CONSENSUS; RESPIRATORY SYSTEM;

EID: 85015176792     PISSN: 00032409     EISSN: 13652044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/anae.13859     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Ward PA, Irwin MG. Man vs. manikin revisited - the ethical boundaries of simulating difficult airways in patients. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 1399–403.
2. Cambridge English dictionary. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/consensus (accessed 26/01/2017).
3. McLintic AJ, Irwin MG. Is the jury out on consensus opinion? Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 256–60.
4. Griffiths R, Shinde S, Clyburn P. ‘Come together’. How the AAGBI reaches consensus over its guidelines. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 261–4.
5. Sutherland NS. Irrationality. London: Pinter and Martin, 2007.