-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
,
Dr. Monika Asthana 
,
Dr. Satyadev Sharma
,
Dr. Purabi Roy
,
Dr. Sarika Amdekar
,
Dr. Vinod Singh
,
Dr. Om Parkash
,
Dr. Rajendra Sharma
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The paper illustrates the importance of medicinal plants and suggests DNA microarray applications in medicinal plant studies.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No
Preeti Chavan, Kalpana Joshi, and Bhushan Patwardhan. DNA Microarrays in Herbal Drug Research. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2006 December; 3(4): 447–457.
Linhai Niu, Nitin Mantri, Chun Guang Li , Charlie Xue , and Edwin Pang. Array-based techniques for fingerprinting medicinal herbs. Chin Med. 2011; 6: 18.Chapter 15. Applications of Microarray Technology in Ethnomedicinal Plant Research
Mahmoud Youns , Jörg D . Hoheisel and Thomas EfferthCitation InformationEthnomedicinal PlantsRevitalizing of Traditional Knowledge of HerbsEdited by Mahendra Rai , Deepak Acharya and José Luis RíosScience Publishers 2011Pages 424–443Print ISBN: 978-1-57808-696-2eBook ISBN: 978-1-4398-5362-7DOI: 10.1201/b10495-16Pharmainfo.net:DNA Microarrays Technique: Application In Pharmacy
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
No
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No results were discussed. It might be useful for the authors to start with this recent review to include additional information. Niu L, Mantri N, Li CG, Xue C, Pang E. Array-based techniques for fingerprinting medicinal herbs. Chin Med. 2011 May 18;6(1):18.
-
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 applicable
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not applicable
-
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?
Scientific information should be reveiwed thourghly A list or references should be added by the end of the paper It might be worth adding a table containing the medicinal plants and their applications Typing and gramatic errors should be corrected
Results of relevant publications should be discussed and justified
-
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 I wish to see the application of this work in oncology to be presented
-
Other Comments:
No
-
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 have experience in the molecular biology techniques and reviewing papers.
- How to cite: El-Abd E I.Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant [Review of the article 'Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant ' by Sharma R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002151
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Microarray technology is a emerging field in bioscience,on the basis of those aspects microarray technology is very important.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Its not a novel approach.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Ok Still need references.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Support of claims there were no evidence in this paper.like any stastistical work,figures represents,photographs and so on.
-
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?
As i told before there were no evidence in any case.
-
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?
Not Outstanding.
-
Other Comments:
1.launguage
2.editing
3.less references
4.no proof of claims.
-
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:
No
- How to cite: Patnaik H H.Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant.[Review of the article 'Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant ' by Sharma R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002147
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Usefulness of DNA microarray in the study of medicinal plants which is very useful, important and an emerging branch.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
As the paper claims it to be a review article; it must have an abstract, introdution and references to claim the authenticity of the article. Which are missing totally.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
As it is a review paper; it is ok as there is no result, but there must be a conclusion section.
-
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?
Information,like where microarray had been used with specific references, can make it a better article.
-
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, It is not outstanding. Whereas it can be improved by implementing the above advises.
-
Other Comments:
As it is posted in review section by the authors, it should obey the methodology of writing a review by introducing different sections. In review article we usually review other authors papers , therefore, Refference section is a must which is missing. Though the article is not written properly, oterwise the objective or topic selection is good.
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
Yes
-
References:
NA
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Pradhan S .Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant[Review of the article 'Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant ' by Sharma R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002142
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The article "Importance of using DNA microarrays ... plant" by Avinash Kumar et al., can be considered as a general commentary on the importance of DNA microarrays in medicinal plant research. However, the choice of journal may be wrong. There are various journals on ayurveda research and microarrays. Despite this, as the authors have paid for the article which is now published, a review of the same is now being done.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
References to various statements made in the different sections of the article, viz., Introductory paragraph, Economic Importance, Epidemiology, etc., are missing.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No results presented. This article is a general commentary on DNA microarrays.
-
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 applicable (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?
NA.
-
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?
1. No, the article is not an outstanding paper in its discipline and certainly not the first.
2. Perhaps, this is a lecture notes masquerading as a journal paper. Let's hope it is not an advertisement or a 'sales talk' to a highly qualified audience.
-
Other Comments:
1. As mentioned earlier, references to many of the statements made and statistics presented are missing.
2. At places the construction of sentences is bad (I'm no good in this direction either - pun intended!). The authors can do better in this direction.
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
Research in Biotechnology (Virology/Immunology) for more than a decade and a half.
- How to cite: Anonymous.DNA Microarrays.[Review of the article 'Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant ' by Sharma R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002120
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The paper tried to demonstrate the usefulness of DNA microarray in the study of medicinal plants.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No, the claim is not novel.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Too few literatures were cited
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
The paper is a review.
-
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 applicable
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not applicable
-
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?
Additional information, especially citing of specific examples where microarray had been used in this regard and incorporating references, for there is hardly any reference in the article.
-
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?
It is not outstanding. Yes I wiill like to see this work
-
Other Comments:
The paper will benefit alot, in the review of the English language, as there are many grammatical errors. The authors hardly mention any references in the text. No references were given at the end of the paper. Since this is a review paper, it is highly necessary to give credit to authors whose work were cited. Moreover, since the paper was supposed to be a review, cogent examples in the use of microarray is an obrigatory part that is missing. The paper seems to be more of a 'perspective' paper than a 'review'. There is lack of proper linking of the two main essential parts: 'medicinal plants' and 'DNA microarray'. Authors need to review the paper carefully, as the topic under discussion is very important and an emerging array of science. Given the concerns mentioned here and the significance of this topic, it will be worthwhile to make a thorough review of the article to improve it´s quality.
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
I have some years of experience in writing, corrections of articles of this kind including editing. Besides,my areas of research borders on the key concepts mentioned in the article.
- How to cite: Balogun S O.Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant[Review of the article 'Importance of Using DNA Microarray in Studying Medicinal Plant ' by Sharma R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002119
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
The paper claims that DNA microarray is an important tool in the study of medicinal plants that could be used to identify their theraputic potential. While the idea is interesting DNA microarray is but one tool that can be used in this endevour.
Neither DNA microarray nor the use of medicinal plants is novel. Use of DNA microarrays in plants is not novel either. A quick pubmed search using keywords like "Medicinal plants, DNA microarray" shows the plethora of articles published in the field. There is no novel data in this paper. The authors do not give any idea about their plan of action in using DNA microarrays. How will DNA microarrays help you in identifying potential plants for new threaputics?
NA
There are no results in this paper. This paper strikes me as an essay about DNA microarray and statistics about the importance of medicinal plants.
It is the absence of a proper protocol that is so concerning about the paper.
There is no methodology in the paper. The paper describes photolithographic and cDNA microarray production but neither are in context to what the authors claim they want to do.
Instead of describing DNA microarray, which is a well known and used technology; the authors should have included studies done on medicinal plant using a DNA microarray.
The potential of identifying new theraputics from plant sources is outstanding. However this paper makes no attempts at setting up experiments or a plan of action. The paper is not worth presenting in a seminar or a lecture.
1. spelling mistakes and poor grammer.
2. no data or eperimental plan.
3. no references.
None
No
No
I have 8 years experience in Molecular and Cell Biology, Genetics, Immunology and Virology.