- Email: [email protected]
Use of email to acquire information from experts
Correspondence
Haider Warraich [email protected] Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA 1
2
3
4 5
Sutter RW, John TJ, Jain H, et al. Immunogenicity of bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 1682–88. Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Polio this week. http://www.polioeradication.org/ Dataandmonitoring/Poliothisweek.aspx (accessed Jan 4, 2011). IRINAsia. Pakistan: polio cases continue to climb. http://www.irinnews.org/report. aspx?ReportId=90965 (accessed Dec 21, 2010). Warraich HJ. Religious opposition to polio vaccination. Emerg Infect Dis 2009; 15: 978. Crawford NW, Buttery JP. Poliomyelitis eradication: another step forward. Lancet 2010; 376: 1624–25.
Use of email to acquire information from experts
Photolibrary
The advent of the internet has ushered in an era of unprecedented access to information. Email provides an unobtrusive way of contacting experts in search of information that might not be readily available from local faculty or published literature. Its usefulness, however, depends on the willingness of such experts to respond to emails from unknown people. A real-life situation of preparing a departmental presentation on a relatively new technology (confocal laser endomicroscopy) provided the opportunity to test the efficiency of email in contacting experts and assessing responses. I obtained a list of current users of the technology in the USA and Canada from a device manufacturer’s website.1 Of 51 gastroenterologists listed, 43 had email addresses that could be gleaned by searching hospital or university websites, or by accessing publications on which the practitioner was the corresponding author. On Sept 4, 2010 (the first day of a 3-day weekend in the USA), I sent individualised one-time emails with 208
the same specific academic question from my institutional email address, introducing myself as a trainee. I sent a “thank-you” reply to all who responded. All responses received until the day of the presentation (Sept 17, 2010) were included in the analysis. Of emails sent to 43 gastroenterologists from 23 institutions, four were returned as “undeliverable”, leaving 39 of 51 presumed to be contacted successfully. 30 of 39 responded, 20 of whom did so during the extended weekend, and 26 by the first working day. The earliest response was within 30 min, and the last was 13 days later. Three of four on scheduled vacation responded during their vacation. Four sent articles or presentation slides, and three provided insights into ongoing studies, unavailable in published literature. Five referred me to others who might help, and three offered to answer questions over the telephone. Breakdown by academic rank showed that nine of 12 professors, ten of 11 associate professors, and nine of 12 assistant professors responded to the initial email. This experience shows that most academicians, irrespective of rank, respond rapidly to emailed requests for help in their area of expertise. In medical sciences, contacting experts grants access to valuable personal insights and information regarding ongoing trials. This analysis indicates that, when used appropriately, email can serve as an important ancillary educational tool, especially in the acquisition of otherwise inaccessible knowledge.
Trans-Pacific parallels The cover quote on your Oct 25, 2008, issue reads, “Achieving health equity is China’s main health challenge, in view of incomplete coverage, uneven access, mixed quality, escalating cost, and high risk of catastrophic health expenditures.” As an American, I felt an uneasy shiver of recognition. I declare that I have no conflicts of interest.
Thomas E Finucane tfi[email protected] Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA
I declare that I have no conflicts of interest.
Navin Paul [email protected] Department of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 1
Mauna Kea Technologies physician locator. http://www.maunakeatech.com/patients/ 188/physician-locator (accessed Sept 3, 2010).
Department of Error The Lancet. Female genital mutilation and social change. Lancet 2010; 376: 1800—In this Editorial (Nov 27), the first paragraph, line 16, should have read: “says author Francesca Moneti.” This correction has been made to the online version as of Jan 14, 2011.
www.thelancet.com Vol 377 January 15, 2011
Haider Warraich [email protected] Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA 1
2
3
4 5
Sutter RW, John TJ, Jain H, et al. Immunogenicity of bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 1682–88. Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Polio this week. http://www.polioeradication.org/ Dataandmonitoring/Poliothisweek.aspx (accessed Jan 4, 2011). IRINAsia. Pakistan: polio cases continue to climb. http://www.irinnews.org/report. aspx?ReportId=90965 (accessed Dec 21, 2010). Warraich HJ. Religious opposition to polio vaccination. Emerg Infect Dis 2009; 15: 978. Crawford NW, Buttery JP. Poliomyelitis eradication: another step forward. Lancet 2010; 376: 1624–25.
Use of email to acquire information from experts
Photolibrary
The advent of the internet has ushered in an era of unprecedented access to information. Email provides an unobtrusive way of contacting experts in search of information that might not be readily available from local faculty or published literature. Its usefulness, however, depends on the willingness of such experts to respond to emails from unknown people. A real-life situation of preparing a departmental presentation on a relatively new technology (confocal laser endomicroscopy) provided the opportunity to test the efficiency of email in contacting experts and assessing responses. I obtained a list of current users of the technology in the USA and Canada from a device manufacturer’s website.1 Of 51 gastroenterologists listed, 43 had email addresses that could be gleaned by searching hospital or university websites, or by accessing publications on which the practitioner was the corresponding author. On Sept 4, 2010 (the first day of a 3-day weekend in the USA), I sent individualised one-time emails with 208
the same specific academic question from my institutional email address, introducing myself as a trainee. I sent a “thank-you” reply to all who responded. All responses received until the day of the presentation (Sept 17, 2010) were included in the analysis. Of emails sent to 43 gastroenterologists from 23 institutions, four were returned as “undeliverable”, leaving 39 of 51 presumed to be contacted successfully. 30 of 39 responded, 20 of whom did so during the extended weekend, and 26 by the first working day. The earliest response was within 30 min, and the last was 13 days later. Three of four on scheduled vacation responded during their vacation. Four sent articles or presentation slides, and three provided insights into ongoing studies, unavailable in published literature. Five referred me to others who might help, and three offered to answer questions over the telephone. Breakdown by academic rank showed that nine of 12 professors, ten of 11 associate professors, and nine of 12 assistant professors responded to the initial email. This experience shows that most academicians, irrespective of rank, respond rapidly to emailed requests for help in their area of expertise. In medical sciences, contacting experts grants access to valuable personal insights and information regarding ongoing trials. This analysis indicates that, when used appropriately, email can serve as an important ancillary educational tool, especially in the acquisition of otherwise inaccessible knowledge.
Trans-Pacific parallels The cover quote on your Oct 25, 2008, issue reads, “Achieving health equity is China’s main health challenge, in view of incomplete coverage, uneven access, mixed quality, escalating cost, and high risk of catastrophic health expenditures.” As an American, I felt an uneasy shiver of recognition. I declare that I have no conflicts of interest.
Thomas E Finucane tfi[email protected] Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA
I declare that I have no conflicts of interest.
Navin Paul [email protected] Department of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 1
Mauna Kea Technologies physician locator. http://www.maunakeatech.com/patients/ 188/physician-locator (accessed Sept 3, 2010).
Department of Error The Lancet. Female genital mutilation and social change. Lancet 2010; 376: 1800—In this Editorial (Nov 27), the first paragraph, line 16, should have read: “says author Francesca Moneti.” This correction has been made to the online version as of Jan 14, 2011.
www.thelancet.com Vol 377 January 15, 2011