You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
The Authors' reply
  1. Daniel Lasserson1,
  2. Thierry Buclin2,
  3. Paul Glasziou3
  1. 1Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  2. 2Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
  3. 3Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Daniel Lasserson, Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2ET, UK; daniel.lasserson{at}phc.ox.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300624

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The Authors' reply We thank Dr Marshall1 for this opportunity to expand on our conclusions.2 While agreeing with our main findings, his critique of our suggestion about rapid titration has, to an extent, been addressed in the article where we outlined the limitations of our conclusions and suggested that an individual patient data meta-analysis would advance …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Linked article 300584.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles

    • PostScript
      Mistaken conclusions
      Tom Marshall
      Heart 2011; 97 2090-2091 Published Online First: 10 Nov 2011. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300584