Hastings Cent Rep. 2016 Nov;46 Suppl 2:S41-S44. doi: 10.1002/hast.658.
The National Football League Physicians Society read with disappointment the article "A Proposal to Address NFL Club Doctors' Conflicts of Interest and to Promote Player Trust." In spite of the authors' suggestions, NFL physicians are accomplished medical professionals who abide by the highest ethical standards in providing treatment to all of their patients, including those who play in the NFL. It defies logic for the authors not to have engaged experienced and active NFL physicians from the very start of their effort to explore, challenge, and recommend significant alterations to the delivery of health care to NFL players. As troubling as this article is from so many perspectives, it does represent an opportunity for the NFLPS to set the record straight and call attention to the excellent quality of care NFL players receive. In addition, it represents an opportunity to expose the extraordinarily weak evidence presented in the article and to refute the baseless allegations that challenge the high ethical standards of NFL physicians. Contrary to solid scientific research that starts with a hypothesis based on theory, in this case, it seems quite apparent that the authors started with a predetermined conclusion and set out to justify it. Their premise was flawed, and they failed in their execution.
美国国家橄榄球联盟医师协会失望地阅读了这篇文章“解决 NFL 俱乐部医生利益冲突并增进球员信任的提案”。尽管作者提出了建议，但 NFL 医生是经验丰富的专业医疗人员，他们在为所有患者（包括在 NFL 打球的患者）提供治疗时都遵守最高的道德标准。从作者开始努力探索、挑战和建议对 NFL 球员医疗服务的重大改变时，他们就没有让有经验和活跃的 NFL 医生参与，这是没有道理的。从许多方面来看，这篇文章都令人困扰，但它确实为 NFLPS 提供了一个纠正错误、关注 NFL 球员获得的优质护理的机会。此外，这也为揭露文章中提出的极其薄弱的证据以及反驳那些挑战 NFL 医生高标准的毫无根据的指控提供了机会。与从理论基础上的假设开始的坚实科学研究相反，在这种情况下，作者似乎很明显是从预先确定的结论开始，并着手证明其合理性。他们的前提是有缺陷的，他们的执行也失败了。
