Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:36:50.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Specialists, guidelines and turf battles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Sue Ieraci
Sue Ieraci*
Affiliation:
Vice-President and past Chair of Standards Committee Australasian College for Emergency Medicine

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letters • Courrier
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , October 1999 , pp. 161
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 1999

References

1.Innes, G.Emergency department sedation guidelines: a tale of two specialties [editorial]. CJEM 1999;1(2):88,136–9.Google Scholar
2.Donald, D.Emergency department sedation [letter]. CJEM 1999;1(2):92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Ross, J.Emergency department ultrasound for the assessment of abdominal trauma: an overview [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):117–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Ducharme, J.Ultrasound in emergency medicine [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2): 119–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Filiatrault, L.Ultrasound in the ED: a different point of view [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):120–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Matthews, R.Emergency department ultrasound—practical and political [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):121–2.Google Scholar
7.Campana, B.The ultrasound controversy [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):122.Google Scholar
8.Ip, U.An ultrasound program for the emergency department [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.McPhee, D.A radiologist’s perspective [controversy]. CJEM 1999;1(2):123–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed