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

NOEL ROYDHOUSE, ChM, FRCS
118 Remuera Rd Auckland, 5, New Zealand

Arch Otolaryngol. 1971;94(5):480.

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

I agree with Dr. Stuart Mawson that the three controlled trials are in sufficient agreement to avoid controversy. This agreement of the basic findings heartened me somewhat as to the correctness of my trial, and all goes to prove that the operation is a good one for the correctly selected case.

The comment over which Dr. Mawson takes issue was not meant disparagingly but to prove the point that the operation does produce good results in the correctly selected case, and to prove the point to the antioperation lobby which needs a more convincing result than "the actual number of sore throats prevented might be only 96, or less than half a sore throat per operation." To do this, a section on "factors arising during the survey which affected statistical results" was introduced, giving a total duration of illness saved in the two-year followup as being 16 days as compared . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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