Submited on: 06 Nov 2011 01:18:17 PM GMT
Published on: 07 Nov 2011 04:05:30 PM GMT
 
Review
Posted by Dr. Subhagata Chattopadhyay on 09 Nov 2011 02:35:09 AM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? No
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    This is a case study. It requires validation, which is grossly missing in this paper. So the reliability of the interpretation is questionable. Validation with data is therefore needed.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I am working on mental health over 10 years.

  • How to cite:  Chattopadhyay S .Review[Review of the article 'Malingering In Forensic Psychiatry Evaluation ' by Marashi S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(11):WMCRW001110
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Malingering In Forensic Psychiatry Evaluation
Posted by Dr. Naseem A Qureshi on 01 Jan 2012 04:32:26 AM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? No
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? No
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    This case report is about one of the types of factitious disorders. The clinical vignette of the case is too short to understand it in more specific terms. Details are required. Factitious disorders including malingering is common among patients with legal problems. Patients with malingering fake physical or psychological symptoms or present with a mix, which are precisely identified by the evaluator because they have explicit motives behind faking symptoms consciously, unlike Munchausen syndrome. We believe that this case report is important because it is from Middle East country, the data from this part of the world on factitious disorders is sparse. However, the case presentation and discussion is poorly written.

  • Competing interests:
    NONE
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Munchausen's syndrome case report published in Indian J Psychiatry
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Yes

  • How to cite:  Qureshi N A.Malingering In Forensic Psychiatry Evaluation[Review of the article 'Malingering In Forensic Psychiatry Evaluation ' by Marashi S].WebmedCentral 2011;3(1):WMCRW001325
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse