[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
September 1953


AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1953;50(3):275-276. doi:10.1001/archopht.1953.00920030282001

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


An editorial in the April, 1951, issue of the A. M. A. Archives of Ophthalmology called attention to the large number of manuscripts rejected because of failure of the authors to submit adequate controls from which the merits of their conclusions could be judged. Articles claiming encouraging results from the use of a particular remedy are constantly being submitted for publication with no attempt to evaluate the remedy by treating a similar group of patients with an inert placebo over the same period of time and checking the end-results in both groups statistically. The folly of publishing misleading information is apparent, and occasionally tragic, since unfortunate persons with incurable eye diseases will always grasp at any straw offered, and will spend their last penny in an effort to obtain a cure. When a scientific journal publishes an enthusiastic report on a new form of therapy, the editors have assumed some

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview