JAMA Forum: When Publicity Preempts Peer Review

It’s evidently a day for me to point you to read me elsewhere. The JAMA Forum:

About 2 months ago, the media was full of news stories about a study called the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). This media attention wasn’t because of the publication of a peer-reviewed article. It was because the National Institutes of Health held a media briefing about ending the trial early.

If you remember, I wasn’t thrilled about this. Others had thoughts on this as well. Now that the results have been published, I revisit the release, and why I still think that peer review, and journals, still have a place in the scientific endeavor.

Go read!

@aaronecarroll

Aaron Carroll

Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS is co-Editor-in-Chief of The Incidental Economist and tweets at @aaronecarroll. He is the Chief Health Officer at Indiana University. He is also a Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics and Associate Dean for Research Mentoring at the Indiana University School of Medicine. In addition to contributing regularly to The New York Times and the Atlantic, he is the author of four books, most recently The Bad Food Bible.

Hidden information below

Aaron Carroll

Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS is co-Editor-in-Chief of The Incidental Economist and tweets at @aaronecarroll. He is the Chief Health Officer at Indiana University. He is also a Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics and Associate Dean for Research Mentoring at the Indiana University School of Medicine. In addition to contributing regularly to The New York Times and the Atlantic, he is the author of four books, most recently The Bad Food Bible.

The Incidental Economist

the health services research blog

Boston-area website management by BKJ Productions
Editors In Chief
Managing Editor

Work posted here under copyright © of the authors • Details on the Site Policies page

Subscribe

Email Address*