He Clinical Evidence in-house group will conduct the searches for contributors
As a peer reviewer you'd be asked for the views on the clinical relevance, validity, and LCL161 cost accessibility of specific topics inside the journal, and their usefulness towards the intended audience (international generalists and healthcare title= s12936-015-0787-z professionals, possibly with limited statistical know-how). Arch Dis Child 1985;60:407?4.He Clinical Evidence in-house team will conduct the searches for contributors; your process is just to filter out high high-quality research and incorporate them within the current text.N N N N NIf you'd prefer to turn into a contributor for Clinical Evidence or require far more information about what this entails please send your make contact with particulars plus a copy of your CV, clearly stating the clinical region that you are enthusiastic about, to CECommissioning@bmjgroup.com.Contact for peer reviewersClinical Evidence also must recruit a variety of new peer reviewers specifically with an interest within the clinical areas stated above, and also others related to common practice. Peer reviewers are healthcare specialists or epidemiologists with experience in evidence-based medicine. As a peer reviewer you would be asked for your views around the clinical relevance, validity, and accessibility of certain subjects within the journal, and their usefulness towards the intended audience (international generalists and healthcare title= s12936-015-0787-z professionals, possibly with limited statistical understanding). Topics are often 1500-3000 words in length and we would ask you to critique involving 2-5 subjects per year. The peer critique approach requires location throughout the year, and out turnaround time for every assessment is ideally 10-14 days. For anyone who is serious about becoming a peer reviewer for Clinical Proof, please comprehensive the peer evaluation questionnaire at www.clinicalevidence.com/ceweb/contribute/peerreviewer.jspwww.archdischild.com FSharpe, Mulpuri, Chan, et al7 Hassbeek JF, Wright JG, Hedden DM. Is there a distinction in between the epidemiologic characteristics of hip dislocation diagnosed early and late? Can J Surg 1995;38:437?. eight Danielsson L. Late-diagnosed DDH: a potential 11-year follow-up of 71 consecutive patients (75 hips). Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:232?two. 9 Zenios M, Wilson B, Galasko CSB. The impact of selective ultrasound screening in late presenting DDH. J Pediatr Orthop B 2000;9:244?. 10 Place MJ, Perking DM, Fritton JM. Effectiveness of neonatal screening for CDH. Lancet 1978;29:249?0. 11 Ilfield FW, Weston GW. `Missed' or late-diagnosed CDH. Isr J Med Sci 1980;16:260?. 12 Lehmann HP, Hinton R, Morello P, et al. Developmental dysplasia with the hip practice guideline: technical report. Committee on High-quality Improvement, and Subcommittee on Developmental Dysplasia with the Hip. J Pediatr 2000;105:E57. 13 Chan A, Cundy PJ, Foster BK, et al. Late diagnosis of congenital dislocation in the hip and presence of a screening programme: South Australian populationbased study. Lancet 1999;354:1514?7. 14 Palmen K. Prevention of congenital dislocation of your hip. The Swedish encounter of neonatal therapy of hip joint instability. Acta Orthop Scand 1984;55(suppl 208):1?07.15 Yiv BC, Saidin R, Cundy PJ, et al. Developmental dysplasia of your hip in South Australia in 1991: prevalence and danger things. J Paediatr Kid Wellness 1997;33:151?. 16 Chan A, McCaul K, Cundy PJ, et al. Perinatal risk components for developmental dysplasia of your hip. Arch title= s12687-015-0238-0 Dis Youngster Fetal Neonatal Ed 1997;76:F94?00. 17 McLean A, Keane RJ, Sage L, et al. Validation of the 1994 South Australian title= hr.2012.7 perinatal data collection type. Pregnancy Outcome Statistics Unit, Epidemiology Branch, Division of Well being. South Australia, 2001. 18 Dunn PM, Evans RE, Thearle MJ, et al. Congenital dislocation from the hip: early and late diagnosis and management compared. Arch Dis Child 1985;60:407?4.