J. Orthod.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hunt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hunt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, L.
Journal of Orthodontics, Vol. 30, No. 2, 178, June 2003
© 2003 British Orthodontic Society


Features Section

Letter to the Editor

Nigel Hunt1 and Laura Mitchell2

1 Chairman of the Intercollegiate MOrth panel and member of the Board of the Intercollegiate Membership in Orthodontics
2 Chairman of the Board of the Intercollegiate Membership in Orthodontics

Dear Sir,

We would like to express our concern over the guest Editorial, which appeared in the December 2002 edition of the Journal of Orthodontics.

We feel that this editorial should have made it clear that these views were those solely of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of the author’s co-examiners nor, indeed, those of the governing body for which the author is a representative as an examiner. We are concerned that, as a result, candidates could be misled into thinking that a Royal London Hospital Space Analysis is a requirement of the Intercollegiate Membership in Orthodontics.

We would like to reassure trainees and their trainers that future candidates will not be penalized if they choose not to undertake the analysis, in the same way that examiners are not prescriptive as to which particular cephalometric analysis is performed. We are sure the author did not intend to suggest personal bias with regard to a candidate’s examination approach.

The merits or otherwise of the Royal London Space Analysis is a separate issue, which could perhaps be discussed at greater length in another forum. We wish, at this juncture, to reassure our trainees.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hunt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hunt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, L.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS