This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
THE POSITION of the Annual Review in the back pages of the ARCHIVES belies its potential value to the reader. Prepared by associate editors, who are chosen as recognized authorities in their subspecialties, the reviews are designed to contain a critical assessment of the recent literature.
Begun under the tutelage of Francis Heed Adler, MD, and nurtured by David Cogan, MD, the Annual Review has been well supported by scores of ophthalmologists with subspecialty interests who have been willing to devote unusual time and effort in preparation of a readable, interesting review. Fortunately for the ARCHIVES, the majority of these associate editors have been able to prepare reviews that, because of their analyses, produce a sum which is greater than the contributing parts.
Although the ARCHIVES strives to give the reviewers freedom of comment and criticism toward these articles, it at the same time necessarily places limits on review space.
H. B. Hidden Pearls. Arch Ophthalmol. 1970;83(1):2. doi:10.1001/archopht.1970.00990030004002
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: