Submited on: 08 Apr 2012 10:51:29 PM GMT
Published on: 09 Apr 2012 02:39:23 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? Yes
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:

    This  is a very well researched paper with extensive literature reviews

    Has endeavour to present it with some flare of originality.

    However the literature review is slightly  long .

  • 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:

    This  is a very well researched paper with extensive literature reviews

    Has endeavour to present it with some flare of originality.

    However the literature review is slightly  long .

  • How to cite:  Adelekan M O.Bilateral synchronous classical seminomaof testes with bilateral cannon ball metastases: A case rport with a review of literature[Review of the article 'Bilateral Synchronous Classical Seminoma of Testes with Bilateral Cannon Ball Metastases: A Case Report with a Review of the Literature ' by Baiden-amissah K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(5):WMCRW001789
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? 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? 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:

    The subject is important to rise awareness among men regaring seminomas and in general terms testicular cancers, especially regarding management and the options, suggest alternative surgical methodes, with sparing surgery, which needs further research to see the outcomes.

  • 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:

    Consultant interventional Radiologist with interest in Uro-Radiology

  • How to cite:  Bakir E .Bilateral Synchronous Classical Seminoma of Testes with Bilateral Cannon Ball Metastases[Review of the article 'Bilateral Synchronous Classical Seminoma of Testes with Bilateral Cannon Ball Metastases: A Case Report with a Review of the Literature ' by Baiden-amissah K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001723
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse