In the old days, bloggers whose posts were included in the Grand Rounds would link to that post from their own blog. Grand Rounds, for those who are not familiar, is a weekly compilation of the best of the medical blogosphere.
I used to refer to the Grand Rounds once in a while, but quit this habit to prevent that my own posts would get lost amidst the summarizing and/or referring posts.
But I will make an exception for a Grand Rounds edition that is written by a man who combines modern practice along with classic craftsmanship (rather called “old fartness” by the author concerned).
Anyway, Dr Rich of the latest edition of Grand Rounds did a great job with his Grand Rounds 7-50: The Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! Edition.
First of all I was surprised to find a very good summary of my own post. A post about a search topic, which I was rather surprised to find included in the first place. Please let me share this excellent & quite funny plain language summary of my post.
Jaqueline writes Laika’s MedLiblog, a blog dedicated to medical information science. She submits a post entitled, “PubMed’s Higher Sensitivity than OVID MEDLINE… & other Published Clichés,” in which she shows how medical researchers doing literature searches for, among other things, meta-analyses, will stumble upon various “anomalies” in their searches of the PubMed and OVID databases, and then write additional, CV-padding papers about those anomalies. Jaqueline points out that these so-called “anomalies” are actually well-documented “clichés,” which are well-known to information specialists and anyone else who is competent in doing comprehensive literature searches. In other words, Jaqueline has documented that these meta-analysis researchers are rank amateurs at doing the most critical step in conducting meta-analyses – searching the literature for all the appropriate published studies. DrRich has always mistrusted meta-analyses, and Jaqueline has helpfully identified yet another reason to justify such mistrust. He thanks Jaqueline, and whoever planted those database anomalies which allow us to identify potentially incompetent meta-analysis researchers.
Second, I am always happy if a Grand Round not only quotes the posts of the great medical bloggers I already know, but also includes posts of bloggers who are new to me. Today I’ve found two new blogs I’ve subscribed to.
The First is Sharp incisions (… random cuts in the life of a fledgling medical student), a blog started in 2010 by a second year medical student. He/she wrote an affecting post in 5 parts about the harvesting of six vital organs for transplantation from a patient who has been declared brain dead. (First part starts here)
Now, all that was left was to close his incision.
I stood beside the surgeon, watching, but through the sterile drape, I reached for the patient’s hand, squeezed it, and silently said,
‘Thank you. Your legacy lives on in these lives you’ve saved.’
Another blog I subscribed to is In My Humble Opinion (A primary care physician’s thoughts on medicine and life), written by Jordan Grumet (@jordangrumet at Twitter), an Internal Medicine physician. This blog already started in 2008 (just like this blog).
I really enjoyed the beautiful post Sometimes We Are Doctors or as he says at the end of his post:
“We are all patients sometimes… and sometimes we are doctors.”
- Grand Rounds 7:46 (drdeborahserani.blogspot.com)
- Grand Rounds Vol. 6 No. 2 (laikaspoetnik.wordpress.com)
- PubMed’s Higher Sensitivity than OVID MEDLINE… & other Published Clichés. (laikaspoetnik.wordpress.com)