This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Forests Trees; John F. Ensley, MD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119(11):1173-1177.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

DURING THE last 50 years, clinical cancer research has often been criticized for employing an oversimplified or "magic bullet" approach to finding the cause of human cancer and defining its treatment. More importantly, with the acquisition of more detailed knowledge, investigators have often tended to "lose the forest for the trees" and now risk losing the "trees for the leaves." The most important "forest," in the study of human cancer, is the accumulation of observations that result from a careful study of the natural histories and treatment outcomes of patients with these diseases. Although inherently obvious, it is often forgotten that, by definition, the most relevant natural or designed experiments in human cancer occur in human beings. A new term, translational research, has been coined to emphasize the importance of the study of human cancer within the framework of observations pertinent to the natural history and treatment outcome of patients. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?