WebmedCentral.com :: Article Review View

Posted by Dr. Karthick Pandurengan on 16 Nov 2011 05:45:33 PM 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?	Partly
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?	Yes
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?	Yes
11	Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative?	Yes

Other Comments:
In conclusion the author can describe about whether the mordern gadjets(modern investigatory procedures) can be helpful in reducing the incidence of misdiagnosis / missed diagnosis

because this addition in conclusion will add strength to the article and increses the standard of the article
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:

Being surgeon we come across these problems of missed diagnosis and mis-diagnosis,as per the research articles/plenty of reviews suggested that modern investigatory procedures has some role in reducing these kind of problems.
How to cite: Pandurengan K .The acute abdomen-commonly missed and mis-diagnosed conditions-review[Review of the article 'The Acute Abdomen - Commonly Missed And Mis-diagnosed Conditions: Review ' by Ng P].WebmedCentral 2011;2(11):WMCRW001140

Rating
Rating	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9

Report abuse

Posted by Dr. Ralph Schneider on 27 Oct 2011 05:59:50 PM 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?	Yes
3	Is this a new and original contribution?	Yes
4	Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic?	Yes
5	Are structure and length satisfactory?	Yes
6	Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience?	No
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?	Yes
11	Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative?	Yes

Other Comments:
A very well written manuscript listing a lot of differential diagnoses for "the acute abdomen". This paper could be a very good pocket guide for young surgeons to detect also rare causes in patients with acute abdomen.

The short points for each diagnoses make the paper interesting and offer the possibility for a short look at the bedside.

An interesting articel not only for young surgeons....

I strongly encourage the authors to submit a second paper analyzing "common causes" of the acute abdomen.
Competing interests:
Nothing to declare
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:

Surgeon in general, thoracic and vascular surgery in a tertiary referal center.
How to cite: Schneider R .Differential diagnoses of "The acute abdomen" - a guide for young surgeons[Review of the article 'The Acute Abdomen - Commonly Missed And Mis-diagnosed Conditions: Review ' by Ng P].WebmedCentral 2011;2(10):WMCRW001051

Rating
Rating	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9

Report abuse