首页> 外文期刊>Faculty dental journal >Letters to the Editor
【24h】

Letters to the Editor

机译:致编辑的信

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Dear Sir, I am responding to the article by Derek Watson: How elections have an impact on strategic planning in dentistry. When I served on the FDJ Editorial board, it was expected that Opinion articles would be evidence-based. Derek Watson's evidence is his extensive personal political experience, which is informative to read. However, there is one section that I think is open to challenge. He states: "After introducing a ham-fisted and overbearing inspection regime, the Care Quality Commission was so favourably disposed towards the ineffective Chairman of the BDA's General Dental Practice Committee [whom Derek Watson does not name] that it offered him ajob." My source tells me that he is now working for NHS England and providing much-needed expertise in the area of general dental practice. In what way was he ineffective? As a committee chair? As an advocate for GDP? As a representative of the BDA in the wider field? As an opponent of Government? As a dental politician? This opens up a wider debate about the role and effectiveness of our trade unions (i.e., the BDA and BMA), which Derek Watson has touched upon.
机译:亲爱的主席先生,我在回应德里克·沃森(Derek Watson)的文章:选举如何影响牙科战略规划。当我在FDJ编辑委员会任职时,预计Opinion文章将基于证据。德里克·沃森(Derek Watson)的证据是他丰富的个人政治经验,可供阅读。但是,我认为有一个部分可以挑战。他指出:“在引入了ham手and脚的检查制度之后,护理质量委员会对BDA普通牙科执业委员会无效主席(谁是Derek Watson没有名字)如此有利,以至于让他失业。”我的消息来源告诉我,他现在在NHS英格兰工作,并提供一般牙科实践领域急需的专业知识。他以什么方式无效?作为委员会主席?作为GDP的倡导者?作为BDA在更广泛领域的代表?作为政府的对手?作为牙科政客?这引发了关于德里克·沃森(Derek Watson)所涉及的我们工会(即BDA和BMA)的作用和有效性的更广泛的辩论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号