The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2006;88:448-450.
© 2006 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Frederick A. Matsen, III, MD and
Edward V. Fehringer, MD
Corresponding author: Frederick A. Matsen III, MD Department of
Orthopaedics University of Washington Box 356500, 1959 N.E. Pacific
Seattle, WA 98195
matsen@u.washington.edu
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
To The Editor:
The editorial "Are Validated Questionnaires Valid?"
(2005;87:1671-2), by my
respected colleague Bert Zarins, was a provocative piece. While what he says
rings true, there are other aspects to the "validity" issue that
should be added to our thoughtful consideration. I will enlist the help of
another Massachusetts General surgeon who is often, but incompletely,
quoted:
"Already in 1900 I had become interested in what I have called the
End Result Idea, which was merely the common-sense notion that every hospital
should follow every patient it treats, long enough to determine whether or not
the treatment has been successful, and then to inquire `if not, why not?'...
We had found that this routine tracing of every case, interesting or
uninteresting, had brought to our notice many things in which our knowledge,
our technique, our organization, our own skill or wisdom, and perhaps . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Related articles in JBJS:
- Are Validated Questionnaires Valid?
- Bertram Zarins
JBJS 2005 87: 1671-1672.
[Extract]
[Full Text]
|