{"id":24365,"date":"2013-02-11T10:55:44","date_gmt":"2013-02-11T09:55:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/?p=24365"},"modified":"2013-02-11T10:55:44","modified_gmt":"2013-02-11T09:55:44","slug":"richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/","title":{"rendered":"Richard Lehman’s journal review\u201411 February 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"RichardJAMA\u00a0 6 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 309<\/strong>
\n453\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Stone the crows, a great little study from Oz<\/a> that will change your practice at a stroke. They recruited 212 patients with intermittent claudication who had never had invasive treatment\u2014which immediately made me realise the study couldn\u2019t have been done in America, where at the first twinge of calf pain you get a stent or balloon stuck down your femoral artery. No, these were mostly fine specimens of Australian manhood, mean age 65, getting pains below the level of their shorts if they walked too far, despite the fact that one third of them had never smoked and all of them had normal blood pressure. One half of them were randomized to a well-known drug and after six months they found they could walk four minutes longer before they had to stop. The wonder drug? Ramipril 10mg. This is the kind of trial that makes nobody millions of dollars, but which we should all be doing in our fields of interest. It took just three interested hospitals in Southern Australia.
\n<\/p>\n

461\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Stone some more crows! I hadn\u2019t realised the first A in JAMA stood for Australian. This time we move northwards to Brisbane where one university research centre recruited 165 patients with lateral epicondylitis<\/a> and randomized them in 2×2 fashion to receive physiotherapy, corticosteroid injection, or isotonic saline injection (incorrectly described as \u201cplacebo injection\u201d). At one year, the corticosteroid group did markedly worse than the others, and physiotherapy seemed to make little difference to anybody. This should not change your practice because it has been known for a long time from other studies that steroid injections prolong the course of tennis elbow; and that physiotherapy, in most contexts, is simply a way of being seen to do something while nature takes its course.<\/p>\n

NEJM\u00a0 7 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 368<\/strong>
\n503\u00a0\u00a0 And now back to the Northern Hemisphere where the big boys live. This study<\/a> was done in over 30 centres across North America and Europe, and in Iceland, which is somewhere between. Compared with the little fishing boats the Australians used to bring in their useful catch, this looks like an imperial Navy, with battle cruisers and aircraft carriers in full steam. What do they sail forth to capture for the benefit of mankind? \u201cOne SNP in the lipoprotein(a) (LPA) locus (rs10455872) reached genomewide significance for the presence of aortic-valve calcification (odds ratio per allele, 2.05; P=9.0\u00d710\u221210), a finding that was replicated in additional white European, African-American, and Hispanic-American cohorts (P<0.05 for all comparisons). Genetically determined Lp(a) levels, as predicted by LPA genotype, were also associated with aortic-valve calcification, supporting a causal role for Lp(a).\u201d Genomic true believers will argue that this is a real step forward, because it is another piece of evidence that this lipoprotein fraction is implicated in valvular calcification. I leave this for you to decide.<\/p>\n

513\u00a0\u00a0 If you are a major medical journal with a business model that involves large payments for reprints from pharmaceutical companies, then you are bound to love the two wars that ensure your income stream\u2014the Stent Wars (see this week\u2019s Lancet<\/em>) and the Clotbusting Wars. Given the number of competing products and possible study designs, these two wars alone could go on forever, boring and confusing clinicians and filling the coffers of the NEJM<\/em> and the Lancet<\/em> throughout eternity. Rule One for selling reprints is that you make the conclusion of the Abstract<\/a> as favourable as possible, because this is all that most clinicians read:<\/p>\n

\u201cIn acutely ill medical patients, rivaroxaban was noninferior to enoxaparin for standard-duration thromboprophylaxis. Extended-duration rivaroxaban reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk of bleeding.\u201d And for your further information: \u201cThe study was designed and supervised by the steering committee and was sponsored by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Research and Development. The members of the steering committee signed confidentiality agreements with the study sponsors. The data were collected and analyzed by the sponsors. All the authors had full access to the data and analyses and contributed to the writing of the manuscript. Editorial assistance was provided by Chameleon Communications.\u201d But even the best chameleon cannot disguise the fact that that rivaroxaban is more than twice as likely as enoxaparin to cause a bleed requiring two or more units of blood by day 10, and similarly by day 35. So an honest Abstract conclusion might read: \u201cIn acutely ill medical patients, compared with rivaroxaban, enoxaparin provides equal protection from thromboembolism and is considerably safer.\u201d And the editor of this journal was telling us a few weeks ago that we should not mistrust the reporting of industry trials.<\/p>\n

524\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Cutaneous leishmaniasis<\/a> always reminds me of a ferocious, power-dressing Sheffield dermatologist whose update course I attended many years ago. She put up a slide which appeared to show it, and when I gave my opinion, she bellowed, \u201cNo! I knew that would catch somebody out!\u201d My incompetence in this area remains the talk of every Sheffield omnibus and tram; and I only venture out of hiding to tell those of you who can actually recognise the condition that you should treat cutaneous leishmaniasis with paromomycin, with or without gentamicin. Nothing much else works. Bye.<\/p>\n

551\u00a0\u00a0 What we really need is a vaccine for everything. Turning our own, fabulously organized immune system on our enemies is the neatest way to cure any disease, but it has required immense patience and ingenuity to progress from the use of cowpox in the 1770s to the design of new molecules for hidden receptors in the 2010s. I love reading articles about designing tomorrow\u2019s vaccines: this one is fairly broad brush and cautiously optimistic, but best of all the full text is open access<\/a>.<\/p>\n

572\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Why do so many people\u2019s pancreatic islet beta cells cease to function, just when they need more insulin because they are getting heavy and insulin resistant? If you could find a way to stop that, you would abolish type 2 diabetes and become one of the medical heroes of the twenty-first century. Here is a short \u201cmechanisms of disease\u201d paper<\/a>\u2014i.e. labs and mice rather than humans\u2014describing beta cell dedifferentiation. It seems that many beta cells go through a midlife crisis. You know the kind of thing: \u201cI\u2019m stuck here with this person who\u2019s getting fat and makes ever increasing demands on me and I don\u2019t know if I can carry on or even who I am any more.\u201d They probably need counselling.<\/p>\n

Lancet\u00a0 9 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 381<\/strong>
\n451\u00a0\u00a0 Trying to translate research papers into intelligible gobbets of information for jobbing clinicians ever week is certainly good exercise for the ageing brain, but do not imagine that I can be an effective guide to areas of knowledge that I seldom encounter, such as the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis resistant to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Like you, I usually read the editorial to put the paper in context, but this week\u2019s on tofacitinib tells me a lot about Janus kinase receptors, but not a lot about where this new drug might fit into the existing arsenal for resistant RA. And when I read the paper<\/a>, I find the usual sales talk: \u201cInterpretation: In this treatment-refractory population, tofacitinib with methotrexate had rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and physical function over 6 months with manageable safety. Tofacitinib could provide an effective treatment option in patients with an inadequate response to TNFi.\u201d OK; you are Pfizer and this is your chance to get tofacitinib past the licensing authorities. \u201cEmployees of the sponsor were involved in study conception, design, and conduct, and in data collection and data analysis. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.\u201d Hmmm. Last week Richard Horton admitted that snuggling up to pharma might not be the best way to get a clear river of medical knowledge. He edits Britain\u2019s most prestigious medical journal and it is time he started thinking of a better way.<\/p>\n

461\u00a0\u00a0 Not that all non-pharma trials are much better. I utterly fail to understand why this one<\/a> is published in a leading journal, because it has no endpoints of clinical significance but simply measured the angiographic effect of a paclitaxel eluting balloon as opposed to a non-eluting balloon or a paclitaxel eluting stent in patients who had restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. Having some paclitaxel around \u2013 whether from the balloon or the stent – seemed to improve the coronary diameters measured 6 months later. \u201cFrequency of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis did not differ between groups.\u201d So?<\/p>\n

468\u00a0\u00a0 Why bother comparing your drug with anything if The Lancet<\/em> will let you trumpet its benefits without a comparator? Gilead Sciences started off in 2005 with a trial of its once-daily preparation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus once-daily adefovir dipivoxil for 48 weeks, and demonstrated to its own satisfaction that tenofovir DF was more effective than adefovir in terms of viral suppression and relief of histological inflammation. Patients were then switched to open-label tenofovir and followed up: \u201cIn patients with chronic HBV infection, up to 5 years of treatment with tenofovir DF was safe and effective. Long-term suppression of HBV can lead to regression of fibrosis and cirrhosis\u201d says the Interpretation<\/a>. Oh, and in case you hadn\u2019t guessed, \u201cThe sponsors of the study designed the study, gathered the data, and did the analyses. All authors had access to all the data from the study and participated equally in the decision to submit for publication.\u201d Are there better drugs out there for hepatitis B? I\u2019m afraid I have no idea. And would I expect these guys to tell me?<\/p>\n

496\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cPneumonia tends to affect individuals who are also at high cardiovascular risk. Results of recent studies show<\/a> that about a quarter of adults admitted to hospital with pneumonia develop a major acute cardiac complication during their hospital stay, which is associated with a 60% increase in short-term mortality.\u201d Golly, somebody has finally twigged that the heart and the lungs are joined up to each other and live in this space called the chest, or thorax. This could have major implications. We could start thinking of providing services for elderly breathless patients rather than making them wander from chest physicians to cardiologists and back again: we could tackle the problem of the post-hospital syndrome by attending to the cardiovascular risks of chest infections and the right ventricular contribution to heart failure; we could even ask patients what their main problems are and whether they are sufficiently addressed to make them feel safe at home. But all this requires a level of genius far beyond the reach of any known health service.<\/p>\n

BMJ\u00a0\u00a0 9 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 346<\/strong>
\nCorporate crime in the pharmaceutical industry IS THERE A CURE? asks the cover of the BMJ<\/em>. A rather vague answer comes in an opening editorial<\/a>, a much more focussed one in a great piece on Tamiflu by Harlan Krumholz and colleagues<\/a>, and a suitably radical one from the indefatigable Peter G\u00f8tzsche<\/a>. Until crime ceases to pay, and individuals are held to account, don\u2019t expect any change in banking, or tobacco, or arms sales, or in the pharmaceutical industry.<\/p>\n

The BMJ<\/em> was lucky to scoop this paper based on retrieved follow-up data from the Sydney Diet Heart Study (1966-73)<\/a> which recruited men who had had coronary events and successfully lowered their cholesterol by substituting safflower oil for animal fat. This raised mortality by a third over five years. Beware omega 6 linoleic acid which abounds in safflower oil and constitutes more than 50% of sunflower, cottonseed, corn and soy oils. Stick to healthy butter, lard, goose fat and olive oil, as civilised people have done through the centuries.<\/p>\n

I never quite know what to do for the best when investigating urinary tract infection in children, except that I would rather they didn\u2019t have to undergo the physical and psychological cruelty of micturating cystourethrography. Most don\u2019t: this Rational Imaging article <\/a>is detailed and clear. However, the case example is unfortunate: a five month old boy who has a single UTI and goes through ultrasound, micturition cystourethrography, and finally DMSA scanning to prove that he doesn\u2019t have scarring\u2014and who has no further episodes of UTI.<\/p>\n

Plant of the Week:<\/strong> Corylus avellana<\/strong> <\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

The common hazel can be a magical plant at this time of year, if you know of a wood where snowdrops grow beneath, and the hazels can catch the sun on their abundant long creamy green catkins.<\/p>\n

Catkin-lovers can also grow Garrya elliptica<\/em>, which is a very large evergreen shrub of a somewhat municipal aspect. It is almost too fit for purpose: the leaves are dark and twisted and shiny, and the catkins are long and fat and grey and superabundant. Let other people plant this monster, either free standing or trained against a wall.<\/p>\n

If I were to seek catkins, I would go for Corylus<\/em> or a related species. The one we actually have is Corylus maxima<\/em> \u201cPurpurea,\u201d a filbert yielding good nuts in the autumn and purplish catkins in late winter. By systematic mistreatment we have managed to keep it quite small. This is essential, or you will have a tousled mass of purple leaves louring over your garden all season long.<\/p>\n

All season\u2026 Yes, we have all the gardening season to look forward to now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

JAMA\u00a0 6 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 309 453\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Stone the crows, a great little study from Oz that will change your practice at a stroke. They recruited 212 patients with intermittent […]<\/p>\n

More…<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":38363,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[111],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24365","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-richard-lehmans-weekly-review-of-medical-journals"],"yoast_head":"\nRichard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Richard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"JAMA\u00a0 6 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 309 453\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Stone the crows, a great little study from Oz that will change your practice at a stroke. They recruited 212 patients with intermittent [...]More...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The BMJ\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/bmjdotcom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"540\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"350\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"BMJ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@bmj_latest\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@bmj_latest\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"BMJ\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"BMJ\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe\"},\"headline\":\"Richard Lehman’s journal review\u201411 February 2013\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2227,\"commentCount\":1,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/02\\\/richard-lehman.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Richard Lehman's weekly review of medical journals\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/\",\"name\":\"Richard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/02\\\/richard-lehman.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/02\\\/richard-lehman.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/02\\\/richard-lehman.jpg\",\"width\":540,\"height\":350},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/2013\\\/02\\\/11\\\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Richard Lehman’s journal review\u201411 February 2013\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/\",\"name\":\"The BMJ\",\"description\":\"Helping doctors make better decisions.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"The BMJ\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/The-BMJ-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/The-BMJ-logo.jpg\",\"width\":852,\"height\":568,\"caption\":\"The BMJ\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/bmjdotcom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/bmj_latest\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe\",\"name\":\"BMJ\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"BMJ\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.bmj.com\\\/bmj\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Richard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Richard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ","og_description":"JAMA\u00a0 6 Feb 2013\u00a0 Vol 309 453\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Stone the crows, a great little study from Oz that will change your practice at a stroke. They recruited 212 patients with intermittent [...]More...","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/","og_site_name":"The BMJ","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/bmjdotcom\/","article_published_time":"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":540,"height":350,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"BMJ","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@bmj_latest","twitter_site":"@bmj_latest","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"BMJ","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/"},"author":{"name":"BMJ","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#\/schema\/person\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe"},"headline":"Richard Lehman’s journal review\u201411 February 2013","datePublished":"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/"},"wordCount":2227,"commentCount":1,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg","articleSection":["Richard Lehman's weekly review of medical journals"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/","name":"Richard Lehman's journal review\u201411 February 2013 - The BMJ","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg","datePublished":"2013-02-11T09:55:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2017\/02\/richard-lehman.jpg","width":540,"height":350},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2013\/02\/11\/richard-lehmans-journal-review-11-february-2013\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Richard Lehman’s journal review\u201411 February 2013"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/","name":"The BMJ","description":"Helping doctors make better decisions.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#organization","name":"The BMJ","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2018\/05\/The-BMJ-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2018\/05\/The-BMJ-logo.jpg","width":852,"height":568,"caption":"The BMJ"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/bmjdotcom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/bmj_latest"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/#\/schema\/person\/ba3da426ed20e8f1d933ca367d8216fe","name":"BMJ","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b4d8f39281bcae118348a1c027347b8e53b82d42520e774a8b50dd9a6ac6c01d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"BMJ"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/"],"url":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24365","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24365"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24365\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/38363"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24365"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24365"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24365"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}