Pubdate: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 Source: Goldstream Gazette (Victoria, CN BC) Copyright: 2007 Goldstream News Gazette Contact: http://www.goldstreamgazette.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1291 Author: Matthew M. Elrod Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n1057/a04.html?83852 INDEPENDENT REVIEW NOT LACKING Re: Independent study needed on injection sites (Letters, Sept. 12). Letter writer Kjell Nilsen opined "What is lacking is an independent evaluation of the Vancouver site and injection sites in general." The external evaluators of the Vancouver site recently explained in Open Medicine, a peer-reviewed, independent, open access journal, "the Vancouver SIF evaluation was designed to stand up to the highest level of scientific scrutiny. Specifically, the following safeguards were put in place. First, a regional SIF oversight committee was developed which included senior members of all stakeholders groups, including the chief of the Vancouver police department and the provincial medical health officer. Second, in accordance with the Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND) criteria for observational research, it was required that the methodology for the evaluation be subject to external peer review to ensure scientific rigour, and publication to ensure scientific openness. Finally, it was required that all findings of the evaluation be subject to external peer review and publication prior to dissemination, and many of these studies were published in top journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine." Citations are customary in peer-reviewed journals, but they are not typically found in letters-to-the-editor. Dr. Keith Martin probably hoped that interested readers would take the time to independently investigate what research has been done on the Vancouver site and supervised injection facilities in general before jumping to the conclusion that independent evaluations are lacking. Matthew M. Elrod Victoria - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom