Submited on: 13 Sep 2012 10:14:31 AM GMT
Published on: 13 Sep 2012 05:46:09 PM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Study posited that serum electrolytes imbalance is a complication observed in type 1 diabetes which can potentiate kidney failure or cardiac arrythymias as a consequence of high levels of sodium (Hypernatremia) and potassium (Hyperkalemia). Also, the reduced level of testoterone led to the conclusion on impaired fertility or hypogonadism. All of these conclusions are ambiguous, speculative and unsupported by the data provided.

    The data presented do not allow bogus conclusion as seen here. The words 'hyperntremia and hyperkalemia' are used in the wrong context. There was no mention of how authors analysed data collected. And from the tables, it is clear that statistical analysis might not have been considered.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Claims of article are not novel. Inadequate data and absence of appropriate statistical analysis marred study. Nephropathy and subsequently hypertension have been demonstrated in several investigations as complications of type 1 diabetes.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    No. Out of the 3 references (24, 34 & 35) cited to corroborate findings, two could not be located online and the third (24) had no bearing to the present work.

    The Abstract of reference #24 is reproduced below.

    Advances in technology have lowered the limits of viability in premature births to 24 weeks of gestation. This brought forth a new population of children, who are born 3-4 months early and spent considerable amounts of time in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), instead of sterile environment of mother’s womb. Besides, other problems associated with prematurity, these children often undergo invasive procedures resulting in mucosal inflammation and/ or injury by feeding tubes, endotracheal tubes, and prolonged IV catheter. To test whether “ex-preemie-infants” were different than “term-infants” with regard to their immunity, preterm infants (< 32 weeks) and term infants (control) at the corrected age of 9-12 months were analyzed for their resting and stimulated immune responses. Preterm infants had a significant Th1 skewed response, higher number of activated and functionally competent T cells compared to term infants. The critical role of neonatal environmental exposure on immune system development is imminent; neverthelessdetailed mechanistic studies on pathways are warranted.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    No, the data presented do not support the claims. Evidence are required to show how type 1 diabetes alter serum electrolytes leading to kidney failure or cardiac arrythymias.

     

    Although, nephropathy and subsequently hypertension have been demonstrated in several investigations as complications of type 1 diabetes. Authors need to show that serum parameters determined in this case cause the pathologies stated.


  • 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?

    The methodology are fairly presented but not explicit enough to permit adequate reproduction of experiments. Authors should give details on the spectrophometer used for study.


  • 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?

    Assaying for other blood parameters indicative of kidney or heart failure e.g. creatinine, urea, protein, c-protein etc could help.


  • 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. The presentation of study was poor. Introduction was not coherent and authors failed to show how in previous studies diabetes affect serum electrolytes. The article lacks merit for scholarly publication.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • 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:

    .

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.Effect of Type 1 Diabetes On Serum Electrolytes(Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testosterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects[Review of the article 'Effect of Type 1 Diabetes On Serum Electrolytes(Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testosterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects ' by Seyi A].WebmedCentral 2012;3(9):WMCRW002250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper claims increase in serum levels of sodium and potassium and decrease in testosterone levels in male subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    The claims are not novel at all.  There various papers published works on levels of increased serum sodium and potassium levels and decreased testosterone levels in diabetes mellitus as per search in PubMed.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    The claims are not properly placed although few literatures have been cited in this paper.  Previous literature and studies investigated the parameters studied in this paper either independently or collectively. Many references cited in this paper are review type, a few are from the actual experimental journals.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    The results obtained in this paper support the claims. It appears this paper does not address current problem, but repeated previously conducted experiments or reports.


  • 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?

    Protocol is not provided appropriately. Just some copy and paste from the kits used to assay the parameters. It is written in a very unorganized and non-acceptable format for the journal.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Methodologies used are valid. However, it appears that the methodology is very poorly written ina very non-scientific manner and it appears that the author copies and pasted the kit’s protocol exactly. There is no indication of appropriate grouping of the subjects followed by proper statistical analysis.


  • 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?

    This paper is not outstanding at all in its discipline.It is one of the worst paper written very poorly without any objectives of the study properly written and researcfh investigated. It did not ask any potential state-of-the art questions related to diabetes mellitus, which is a very important issue worldwide.


  • Other Comments:

    I recommend that this type paper should not be encouraged to be published. The author also plagiarized from many websites and many more. One such weblink is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus.

     

    Thsi type of authors should be restricted strictly to publish their plagiarized work and penlized or punished for this type work. This type of authors actually downgrade treamendously many good effort of many researchers.

  • 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:

    Nutritional biochemistry and endocrinology

  • How to cite:  Sarkar P K.Alterations in the Serum Levels of Electrolytes and Testosterone in Male Diabetic Patients. [Review of the article 'Effect of Type 1 Diabetes On Serum Electrolytes(Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testosterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects ' by Seyi A].WebmedCentral 2012;3(9):WMCRW002246
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper claims that diabetes causes an elctrolyte imbalance in sodium and potassium levels as well as lower testosterone levels. The claims are important as these complications of diabetes are quite severe.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    The claims are not novel at all. Here are some papers that have looked at all the aspects claimed in the paper:

    1. The dark side of testosterone deficiency: II. Type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance. Traish AM et al. J Androl. (2009)

    2. Screening for hypogonadism in diabetes 2008/9: results from the Cheshire Primary Care cohort.
    Anderson SG,et al
    Prim Care Diabetes. 2012

    3. Acid-base and electrolyte disorders in patients with diabetes mellitus.
    Sotirakopoulos N,et al
    Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2012


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    The claims are in context with the previous literature due to the fact they are copied verbatim from the previous literature.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    The results support the claims, but the claims are a well established scientific fact.


  • 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?

    The protocol is provided and deviations are absent.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    The methodology is valid and there are enough detials to reporduce the analysis.


  • 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?

    The paper would be better if the authors had used their own words to write it. The work done may be original but I do not trust it as explained in the section below


  • 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?

    This paper is not outstanding in any shape or form. In fact it is one of the worst forms of plagarism I have seen. Entire sections are copy pasted from Wikipedia verbatim!!
    1)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus
    2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus_type_1 3)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone
    Even the discussion is copied from this website:http://www.livestrong.com/article/353569-electrolyte-imbalance-in-diabetes/

    This paper is given a 1 rating because there isn't a rating lower than that.


  • Other Comments:

    I cannot consider this paper as a scientific publication. It is more like an essay poorly plagarised from wikipedia and other sites. I am not sure if the authors thought, no one would notice, but just a simple google search of 3-4 sentences in each paragraph points to the website it was taken from. If the introduction and the discussion (with the references ) were plagarised how can the scientific data in the results be trusted?

  • 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:

    Immunology, Molecular and Cell Biology

  • How to cite:  Dotiwala F J.Effect of Type 1 Diabetes on Serum Sodium, Potassium and Testosterone levels in Human Males[Review of the article 'Effect of Type 1 Diabetes On Serum Electrolytes(Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testosterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects ' by Seyi A].WebmedCentral 2012;3(9):WMCRW002240
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Type 1 diabetes predisposes patients to have inbalance in the sodium-potassium levels.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    No:
    Indian J Med Sci. 1992 Oct;46(10):301-3. Serum electrolytes and osmolality in diabetes mellitus.;
    Biol Trace Elem Res. 2011 Dec;144(1-3):463-8. Epub 2011 Aug 5. Correlation between serum electrolytes and fasting glucose and Hb1Ac in Saudi diabetic patients.
    Al-Rubeaan K, Siddiqui K, Abu Risheh K, Hamsirani R, Alzekri A, Alaseem A, Saleh SM, Al-Yami Z, Al-Ghamdi A, Alayed K.


  • 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?

    The results are not enough to justify the conclusion for many reasons


  • 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?

    There are many important details that are missing in the paper. For example what were the criteria for recruiting patients and volunteers, and what were the exclusion criteria?


  • 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?

    There are indeed so many more that have to be done for the paper to be worth being published for the scientific community


  • 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:

    There are so many errors in the materials and method descriptions, manner of the paper presentation, including  results presentation. The discussion is not properly done and wrong citation of references. See for example reference [24] cited to support association between blood glucose and electrolytes. Moreover, was the paper written by one author or more as the concluding part reads (I conclude that serum electrolytes imbalance contributes to the complication observed in type 1......). In addition, there was no mention of statistical analysis used, the issue of ethical clearance and so many more just to mention but few

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:

    Pharmacological mechanisms underlying the anti-ulcer activity of methanol extract and canthin-6-one of Simaba ferruginea A. St-Hil. in animal models. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 134 (2011) 630–636

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Balogun S O.Effect of type 1 Diabetes on Serum Electrolytes (Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testoterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects[Review of the article 'Effect of Type 1 Diabetes On Serum Electrolytes(Sodium and Potassium) Levels and Testosterone Hormone in Human Male Subjects ' by Seyi A].WebmedCentral 2012;3(9):WMCRW002235
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse