Reply to H. M. Ögmundsdóttir & W. P. Holbrook by M. Ebrahimi et al.

نویسندگان
چکیده

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Reply to R.L. Bowen et al, M. Froehner et al, J.L. Leow et al, and C. Brady et al.

Regarding our article on the association of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with increased Alzheimer’s disease risk, Bowen et al, Froehner and Wirth, Leow et al, and Brady et al highlight a number of significant considerations that will prove important in the design of future studies that investigate the association of ADT and Alzheimer’s disease. We agree with Bowen et al and Leow et al tha...

متن کامل

Retraction of articles by H. M. Krishna Murthy et al.

Murthy has noted that he is not in agreement with the retractions.

متن کامل

�������������������������������������������������� A�d��������������i��p���m����������w�m����

his study was carried out to determine the importance of type 2 Diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in 2004 on 40 diabetic and 40 healthy postmenopausal women attending the endocrine clinics in Zanjan. These two groups were matched in terms of age, length of their menopausal period and body mass index. Seru...

متن کامل

Reply to the letter to the editor of R. M. Hasler et al.

We would like to thank Rebecca Maria Hasler and her colleagues [1] for their interest in our report [2] and seize the opportunity to congratulate them on their publication [3] as a valuable contribution to the development of trauma care in Switzerland. Indeed, a comparison of your TARN-based data and our independent registry is of great interest. Our trauma database has been conceived to be ful...

متن کامل

Reply to Comment by Young et al.

Had our study been, as Young et al. imply, a data trawling exercise using hundreds of variables to look for a 'thread', then doubts about its validity might be justified. However, their account of our work bears little relationship to the methods, results or conclusions we report. For example, Young et al. claim that we used 396 tests to address our primary hypothesis. In fact, we used two. You...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine

سال: 2011

ISSN: 0904-2512

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0714.2011.01059.x