This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

What Have We Learned?

Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:119.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

IN AN IDEAL STATE, the experiences of the past should serve as a prescription for the future. The acquisition of medical knowledge follows a logical sequence. It is founded in clinical observations; analysis to understand the relationships underlying the experience; scientific examination of the elements identified as comprising the experience; evaluation and synthesis of the evidence to explain the observations; and finally, after this process has been completed, appropriate treatment options can be formulated. Gittinger's article, "Radiation and Cataracts: Cause or Cure?"¹ presents an account of the early experience of applying a new technology to treat ocular conditions. From a historical perspective, the article presents a message that has clinical relevance even today. It is an example of the haphazard, uncritical application of a therapeutic modality.

The effect of ionizing radiation damage to the lens is a well-recognized consequence of the use of cobalt plaque radiotherapy or proton beam irradiation . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Radiation and Cataracts: Cause or Cure?
John W. Gittinger, Jr
Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119(1):112-116.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT