Practice statements are developed, reviewed, and approved by a majority vote by the position statement committee. Final approval is made by the ACMT Board of Directors.
These statements are intended to summarize a vast body of reviewed literature and expert opinion in a 1-2 page document with a small number (8-10) of references. The intended audience is both college members and others interested in the given topic. We see these as providing the basis for response to media, patients, and the starting point for further reading. They are not intended to be exhaustive treatises; however, they should recognize areas of controversy, providing a position backed by legitimate science. When applicable, each statement should include: * Introduction Introduce the topic or controversy and provide background regarding context (of exposure, contact, etc.) and purpose. * Data Where appropriate, this should be broken out into basic science, animal, human (epidemiologic, case-control, anecdotal) components. While raw numbers and summaries of studies are not required, any relative risk data should be referenced. * Conclusions Brief statement summarizing position of College. While not required, it is encouraged that authors use terms of the Bradford Hill criteria whenever imputing or refuting causation issues (strength of association, specificity, dose response, temporality, coherence, consistency, etc.). * References Major reviews and critiques. Any specific data cited in the statement should be referenced by the author in the body of the statement. * Date Include the date of submission (month/year) and any revisions noted.
All position statements are edited by the committee and then referred to the board. Any comments are reviewed by the authors and the committee. Once endorsed by the board, they are posted on the ACMT website and published in an issue of JMT. All position statements are introduced by a disclaimer indicating that while individual practitioners may differ, this is the position of the college at the time written, after a review of the issue and pertinent literature. The original author(s) are asked to address any questions, indicating the date of any revisions on the statement. Each author must sign a disclosure form discussing any potential sources of bias and conflict of interest.