Abstract
Elsewhere in this issue, Schwartz, Wolfe, and Pauker1 tackle the problem of the equivocal pathological diagnosis, specifically with reference to diagnostic biopsies. As the authors do not hesitate to point out, it is a frustrating experience for the clinician to obtain a biopsy in the hope of receiving a precise pathological diagnosis and to receive instead a diffuse statement of circumstances. Nevertheless, it would be dangerous for a pathologist pushed by a desire for specific answers to return a report that was more specific than the evidence warranted. Communication between pathologists and clinicians must be improved so that there is . . .
Keywords