We wholeheartedly support the reader's emphasis on a thorough review of a study's
methods to ascertain the strength of its conclusions. All research studies have limitations
and it is our job, as editors, to make sure that the important ones are documented.
Therefore, we always appreciate letters pointing out novel limitations or putting
documented ones in additional context. This process helps assess the value of an article,
and can guide the next set of studies, through which we gain knowledge and advance
the science of rehabilitation.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Article info
Footnotes
Disclosures: none.
Identification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine
