Submited on: 13 Nov 2010 03:55:50 PM GMT
Published on: 15 Nov 2010 06:10:06 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? Yes
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:

    Dr. Rosenberg’s detailed description of these MH-Like Syndromes opens a new front in the battle to understand them, and serves as a useful and elegant base for other researchers to help define and ultimately control these often fatal disorders.  The article is well written, concise, and focused and I have no doubt that it will be of great value in motivating others to investigate this field. 

     

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • 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:

    I have been an MHAUS Hotline Consultant for about 25 years and published several articles on MH, but none recently.

  • How to cite:  Adragna M G.Classification of MH-Like syndromes - creating order out of confusion[Review of the article 'Towards A Definition Of Malignant Hyperthermia And Mh-like Syndromes ' by Rosenberg H].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00212
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? 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? 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:

    Dr. Rosenberg's thoughtful article performs a great service for all anesthesiologists, neuromuscular physiologists, geneticists, and clinician alike who are searching for the definition of MH and related syndromes.  It is succincty, clear, and complete.  The importance of this article cannot be understated.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • 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:

    I am a MHAUS Hotline Consultant and have joined several group letters to the editors in response to scholarly publications.

  • How to cite:  Herlich A .Finally, the definitions that we need. A review of "Towards A Definition of Malignant Hyperthermia and MH-like Syndromes[Review of the article 'Towards A Definition Of Malignant Hyperthermia And Mh-like Syndromes ' by Rosenberg H].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00188
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse