{"id":35405,"date":"2015-10-07T11:18:33","date_gmt":"2015-10-07T10:18:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/?p=35405"},"modified":"2015-10-07T11:30:30","modified_gmt":"2015-10-07T10:30:30","slug":"the-bmj-today-dont-call-me-citler","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2015\/10\/07\/the-bmj-today-dont-call-me-citler\/","title":{"rendered":"The BMJ Today: Don\u2019t call me Citler"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"pregnant_woman_wine\"<\/a>\u2022\u00a0<\/strong>Advice on alcohol for pregnant women is the topic of this latest\u00a0head to head debate<\/a>. Mary Mather and Kate Wiles argue that current advice to pregnant women is contradictory and confusing, and they should know that \u201cthere is no threshold of alcohol consumption that is certain to be safe.\u201d<\/p>\n

On the opposing side, Patrick O\u2019Brien says it is wrong to say to pregnant women, \u201cWe\u2019ve confused you, so just abstain: it\u2019s safer.\u201d He adds, \u201cWe all deal with uncertainty in our lives on a daily basis; pregnant women are no less capable of doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"exam\"<\/a>\u2022\u00a0<\/strong>Assessments at UK medical schools are \u201chighly variable\u201d and should be subject to an investigation, Matthew Limb reports in BMJ Careers<\/a>. Researchers from University College London and Keele University expressed \u201cshock\u201d at finding substantial differences between medical courses across the UK, and suggested that students at \u201cassessment heavy\u201d schools are \u201cmore likely to perform better\u201d in both knowledge assessment and clinical exams.<\/p>\n

\u2022\u00a0<\/strong>Hospitals that have been investigated by the Care Quality Commission should be able to challenge or explain the regulator\u2019s judgements, David Oliver argues in The BMJ<\/em><\/a>. Highlighting the case of Addenbrooke\u2019s Hospital in Cambridge, he said, \u201cHospitals have some responsibility in tackling these system issues. But they\u2019re not islands. I\u2019d say they have a positive duty to air them for the good of the whole NHS.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2022\u00a0<\/strong>Finally, it would seem wrong not to mention the junior doctors contract. Sarah Wollaston, chair of the House of Commons Health Committee, has warned that the government\u2019s threat to impose a new contract could have \u201cunintended consequences\u201d <\/a>for the NHS, Gareth Iacobucci reports.<\/p>\n

\u2022\u00a0<\/strong>For a lighter hearted take on the contract debate, a few quiet giggles could be heard across the BMJ<\/em> offices after someone shared this video:<\/p>\n