Responses

Download PDFPDF

Renal ultrasonography not required in babies with isolated minor ear anomalies
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Ear tags and renal anomalies: lack of association

    Dear Editor

    I read this paper with interest. This putative association is another example of a "factoid" that has been handed down as fact from one generation of clinicans to the next. It would be interesting to know the origin. We reviewed the evidence in our journal club some years ago( below) and came to the same conclusion: urinary tract abnormalities and preauricular skin tags The presence of preauricular skin t...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.