-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
,
Dr. P. Parthasarathi Reddy
,
Dr. Mocherla Monica
,
Dr. K. Yadav Rao
,
Dr. A.s.k Bhargava 
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
To assess whether social networking sites such as twitter can be used for oral health surveillance or not.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Yes
-
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?
NA
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Yes. A longer period of observation may give different results.?
-
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?
This is applicable to a v. minor group of population- technologically savvy net users- so does not provide a true picture of the general public
-
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:
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:
No
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
Academician since 20 years
- How to cite: Bhat S S.Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter[Review of the article 'Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter ' by Bhargava A].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002606
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
To assess whether social networking sites such as twitter can be used for oral health surveillance or not.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Claims novel
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Claims properly placed
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Results support the claims
-
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?
Authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Methodology is valid
-
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?
These results need to be incorporated in our next general lecture on the subject
-
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:
None -
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
NA
- How to cite: Yavuz I .Review on Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter [Review of the article 'Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter ' by Bhargava A].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002589
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
There are no claims the objective is to assess if social pages as twitter can be used for oral health surveillance.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
The claim are very novel
-
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 results support claims
-
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 proposed method is correct.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Methodology is correct and can be reproduced.
-
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?
A wider study, may be one or two months will give more reliable results.
-
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 consider this kind of research can provide useful data that is not available in papers published in journals.
-
Other Comments:
No
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
No
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
I am an Oral and Maxillofacial Pathologist and Professor in a Faculty of Dentistry.
- How to cite: Ledesma-Montes C .Review on the Manuscript: Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter[Review of the article 'Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter ' by Bhargava A].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002585
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The main claims of the paper are:
Twitter-based surveillance efforts may provide an important and cost-effective supplement to traditional disease-surveillance systems, especially in urban areas where tweet density is high.
Twitter data can also be used as a proxy measure of the effectiveness of public health messaging or public health campaigns.
Twitter-this new form of surveillance is a promising area of research at the interface between computer science, epidemiology, and dental public health.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Yes
-
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 applicable
-
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 reliable
-
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?
Study period for atleast 1 month would have given different picture
-
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. It throws light on another aspect of Public Health Dentistry less explored.The study is done on a population who are net savy and technology driven. The opinions are independent and not influnced by the Interviewer or the questionairre as in traditional form of qualitative research. Main disadvantage is lack of adequate demographic data that cripples the possibility of finding association or coorelation.But it can help in understanding perceptions and its impact on quality of life
-
Other Comments:
No
-
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:
Professor of Public health Dentistry
- How to cite: Puranik M .Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter[Review of the article 'Oral Health Surveillance Through Twitter ' by Bhargava A].WebmedCentral 2013;4(2):WMCRW002510
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
The authors aim to assess whether social networking sites such as twitter are able to be used for oral health surveillance.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes- These would be a great seminar for dentists and also anyone working in the field of medical informatics.
The authors conclude that Twitter data can be used as a proxy measure to the effectiveness of public health messaging on public health campaigns. They also note the ability to disseminate oral health information and for oral health surveillance. Dental health related information for those seeking advice for the problems from the Twitter community has been noticed to a great extent.
None
No
No
None
Clinical associate professor