British Medical Journal? Impact factor 27.604 in 2018. But in scientific publishing the intended audience is not lay people. You really have to know how to read the articles to determine what they mean. I liked their series of articles called "How to Read a Paper."[0] But keep in mind [1].

0. https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-readers/publications...

1. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...

Thank you, HN is definitely not the intended audience

This is a well-written meta analysis in a top-tier medical journal which demonstrates a convincing relationship between acute respiratory infection, Vit D baseline levels, and supplementation.

However, their conclusion that the findings warrant public health interventions and widespread supplementation is arguable. There are real risks and costs to over-supplementation, and the absolute risk reduction they demonstrate (from 42% to 40%) is not large.

Assuming it's the BMJ that I know of that's the 'British Medical Journal' which is highly regarded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_BMJ

Yes, together with New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet, they are the ‘Nature’ equivalent of medical science.

The BMJ is the Daily Mail of medical journals, its target audience is whisky-nosed old buffers. Real doctors read the Lancet.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2nedgv

According to Wikipedia: “ As of 2008, the five journals that have been cited most frequently by articles published in The BMJ are The BMJ, The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.” So your statement is quite incorrect or you are being sarcastic.