Carragee responds

Abstract

I wish to thank Dr Anderson for his timely inquiry and believe that the following facts show that our manuscript, “A critical review of recombinant human morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spine surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned,” was exhaustively reviewed and appropriately edited before publication. Letter to the editor regarding “A critical review of recombinant human morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spine surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned”The Spine JournalVol. 12Issue 4PreviewThe article, “A critical review of recombinant human morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spine surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned,” by Carragee et al. [1] has created significant controversy. One concern by some readers is the editorial process of this manuscript. The difference between a standard newspaper or magazine and a scientific journal is critical peer review. This process needs to be blinded, fair, and critical. This is especially true when the author is the journal editor who could have an influence over the peer-review process. Full-Text PDF