Have they been contracted by Painchek to assess the tool? Though I do see source of support and conflict of interest is nil. I just find it strange that this work is published in a journal with a 0.65 impact factor which is very low, not to mention to first author is using a .gmail email address, rather than institutional one. Obviously I'm just as excited as everyone that pck is gaining traction but as something who works in the field I just find it odd.
PainChek General Discussion, page-15235
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 5,178 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
