-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Ethnopharmacology of coconut (Cocos nucifera) could has a impact on its new applications in treatment. There are a number of previously published articles supporting this fact.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
This is a review article.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
It is acceptable as a mini review.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
This is a review article.
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
This is a review article.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
This is a review article.
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
Doing more bibliography
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
No
-
Other Comments:
If there'll be a discussion or conlusion about the overall usage and importance of the coconut, it will be better. Please use " , " with a space after it, like this: "coconut, is" Also please use italic first capital letter for scientific names, like this: "Cocos nucifera"
-
Competing interests:
Nothing.
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
Yes
-
References:
I have contributed in 2 research article about ethnopharmacology. And also I am preparing a review article about a herb. But all of them are under review or not ready yet.
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Anonymous.Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp [Review of the article 'Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001964
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
This is a review articles. The article explains the traditional medicinal use of endocarp of cocos nucifera. This findings are based on already estabilshed traditional uses.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Data on the use of cocos nucifera endocarp is already reported in some standard reports on traditional systems of medicine. The authors compiled the data basing on ethnobotanical use of cocos nucifera endocarp.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes, but more informations
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Compilations of informations and data collected is short
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
NA
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
NA
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
Authors are suggested to findout Phytochemical chemical constitents of cocos nucifera endocarp.
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
Yes
-
Other Comments:
Reports on chemical contituents of cocos nucifera endocarp and thier specific uses for pharmacological preperty need to be collected and compiled
-
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:
5 years, I am working on establishing antioxidant properties of some natural plants and their chief constituents.
- How to cite: Choudhury P K.Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp[Review of the article 'Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001962
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Pharmacological properties of Cocos nucifera endocarp and relevancy of Cocos nucifera in the medicinal world. Cocos nucifera useful in treatment of metabolic disorders hence evaluation of each and every property is important.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Claims are not novel but properly stated in the article.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes upto certain extent.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Provided data supports the claim.
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
No
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Yes, to good extent
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
No
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
Good for presented part.
-
Other Comments:
Abstract repeated in introduction.
-
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:
Formulation and Development of novel drug delivery systems such as Liposomes, Nanoparticle and Dry powder Inhalers.
- How to cite: Anonymous.Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp [Review of the article 'Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001959
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Endocarp of cocos nucifera and its pharmacology is very important are where no much reserach took place. So it is worth to have a detailed study
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Eventhough the use is since history No scientific studies have been done on it to proove
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes to some extent
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
The results supports the claim
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
no
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
yes, to good extent
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
good for presented part
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
yes for the reason that indian history can be strenthened
-
Other Comments:
nil
-
Competing interests:
no
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
Yes -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
None -
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
antifungal activity of cocos nucifera
- How to cite: Anonymous.Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp [Review of the article 'Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001897
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
This review articles explains the medicinal use of cocos nucifera endocarp, hard shell of the coconut fruit. Article is short but significant.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
It is a review article, compilation of the already supported data.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Yes
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
Not required
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Significant
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
No
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
Significant
-
Other Comments:
NA
-
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 a pharmacologist with special interest in the natural agents.
- How to cite: Anonymous.Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp[Review of the article 'Review on the Pharmacological Properties of Cocos Nucifera Endocarp ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001854
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
The paper purports to be an original research article investigating the pharmacological properties of the endocarp of Cocos nucifera.
Claims seem to be made from previously published and cited literature. Therefore, they do not seem to be novel.
Literature is referenced at the right places.
Results are not presented appropriately in an easily comprehensible manner.
Methods are inadequately described.
Methodology is difficult to assess since it is not described in adequate detail.
English needs significant improvement.
No.
Organization of the manuscript should be improved. Results should be presented more clearly, perhaps using some visual aids.
No
No
No
None
Drug delivery