A comma and another list of fields can optionally follow note the recursion. An individual field may have whitespace on either end, and the field value may be either a quoted string or a bare string.
A quoted string may not contain a quote, and a bare string may not contain a comma. In a future article, we'll see how we can transform this definition into code that parses a CSV file. Chip Camden has been programming since , and he's still not done. An independent consultant since , Chip specializes in software development tools, languages, and migration to new technology. Editor's Picks. It's time to dump Chrome as your default browser on Android. Women and middle managers will lead the Great Resignation into How Windows 11 makes updates so much smaller.
Linux finally has an impressive cloud-like OS in Ubuntu Web. Best Raspberry Pi accessories and alternatives for All members of clinical governance committees, expert advisers, and those undertaking peer review described below are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest; if declared, conflicts are managed appropriately. BNF Publications follow a rigorous editorial process, to ensure information is correct, up-to-date, and reflects current best practice.
Our editorial team come from a variety of practice-based backgrounds and have a sound understanding of how drugs are used in clinical practice. The accreditation applies to resources produced using the accredited process. More information on NICE accreditation can be viewed at www. BNF Publications processes are also accredited by the ISO Quality Management System, which covers the management, validation, and processing of medicines information to produce BNF products and services through a range of delivery channels to customers.
BNF Publications content creation processes are displayed in the pathway below. Underpinning each stage in the content creation pathway are documented policies, to ensure consistency and rigour at every stage. All content within BNF Publications is created using the process pathway described above. However, as depicted, not all content needs to go through every stage — the point in the pathway that content can be published depends on the type of content.
BNF Publications content and their typical sources can broadly be classed into four types, as described below:. For BNF recommendations, the starting point for research is usually a clinical question. This may be supplemented by reference to the primary literature. If the clinical question posed can be answered by published literature, the search is complete and a BNF-summarised recommendation is created. Policy documents detail the searches that are to be undertaken, covering the identification of best evidence, the details of the search strategies employed, and the databases used.
These tools ensure a systematic approach to the critical appraisal of different source types, by checking against standard criteria. Each type of source e. Each template is accompanied by guidance notes intended to further decrease variation in the process.
If the clinical question posed still cannot be answered after literature searching, or if literature searching only returns low-quality evidence, then expert opinion may be sought to create a BNF-authored recommendation. This ensures that expert opinion is only used if high-quality published sources cannot be identified to resolve the clinical question.
Once the research phase is complete and a decision has been made to create or amend a recommendation, a minimum three-step internal review process is undertaken to enact such changes. Content is written by a clinical writer, then passed to an independent clinical writer who has not been involved with developing the content to be reviewed at this stage the content, search strategy, and sources used are reviewed. If rework is required, this process is repeated until the reviewer is in agreement with the drafted content and is satisfied that the required processes and procedures have been followed, then the content goes to a further independent member of the BNF editorial team to approve.
Only certain clinical members of the editorial team, usually those with greater experience or specialist knowledge, are permitted to approve content. If rework is required, this process is repeated until the approver is satisfied that the content meets the required standard and is fit for publication. BNF Publications content creation is overseen by the formulary committees described above. The editorial team also reserves the right to send recommendations for peer review if there is felt to be particular additional benefit.
While the peer review process helps assure the quality, validity, or relevance of the recommendation to the user base, it can also delay publication of information. The benefit of quick publication is deemed to outweigh the benefits of peer review when the recommendation being published has been derived from a source that is produced according to a robust methodology which in itself has been peer reviewed, and therefore further peer review offers minimal additional advantage.
The redesigned BNF remains an extensive and authoritative reference text for pharmacists and healthcare professionals. For dispensing and prescribing, responding to clinical queries and looking up new medicines and advice on disease treatment, no pharmacist could afford to be without one.
But having worked on the BNF 25 years ago, getting to know it well at that time and using it frequently ever since, perhaps I am a little biased. Most of them are welcome. The first thing you may notice is that the colour used throughout the book has changed from blue to green. More strikingly, and certainly more importantly, the indication and the dose for each drug monograph have been moved together. These two pieces of information are probably the most important for BNF users, and it is useful to be able to access this vital information quickly.
The BNF chapters have also been restructured. While the overall disease areas remain in the same chapters as before e.
0コメント