Responses

Download PDFPDF
Accuracy of pulse oximetry in screening for congenital heart disease in asymptomatic newborns: a systematic review
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  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed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:
    Pulse Oximetry – not a sensitive screening tool for CHD

    Dear Editor,

    Thangaratinam et al(1) should be complimented on the well conducted systematic review on the accuracy of pulse oximetry in screening for congenital heart disease (CHD) in asymptomatic neonates. It needs to be stressed that more than 60% of CHD is actually non-cyanotic and pulse oximetry would offer little if any assistance in their detection. Clinical detection of cyanosis is highly clinician dependent...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.