Submited on: 30 Dec 2012 11:35:00 PM GMT
Published on: 08 Jan 2013 09:30:10 AM GMT
 

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

    The main claims of the paper were how early clinical exposure on medical laboratory technology students could affect their carreer. It is very important to all related to the teaching of medical sciences.


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

    Yes. To my concern this special work is novel.


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

    Yes. They are placed in the teaching field.


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

    Yes. The results quite well 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?

    The methodology applied was multiple questionaires and the authors were very serious about them.


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

    Yes. The methodology is well explained 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?

    No additional information would be of major importance for this paper. What I would suggest is that this kind of work could be replicated elsewhere


  • 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 is important for all involved in teaching.


  • 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 have been a medicine teacher for the last 30 years.

  • How to cite:  Bedin V .The Effects of Early Clinical Exposure on Medical Laboratory Technology Students: Its Effect on Internship Period and their Proffessional Carrer[Review of the article 'The Effects of Early Clinical Exposure On Medical Laboratory Technology Students: Its effect on Internship Period and their professional Carrier ' by Imamwerdi B].WebmedCentral 2013;4(2):WMCRW002543
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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

    This study mentions the importance of Early Clinical Education (ECE) an innovative learning style.

    This method can encourage the strength and depth of learning, develop intellectual skills and enhance integration of theory and practice.

    In fact this method of learning techniques are in place at many Medical college undergraduate teaching in  Institutions across the globe. In India, Medical Council of India has made it mandatory from this year onwards to impart this change in undergraduate curriculum.

    This new change from the traditional way of learning methods has very good impact on the students performance and boosts their confidence at all levels.

    As Authors have mentioned in their write up that such works have not taken place in their field, they need to be appreciated for this initiative.


  • 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. Good literature search with references from the previous articles.


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

    Yes. Results clearly mentioned in different domains among the graduates and interns.


  • 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?

    Authors have designed their own questionnaire for this study. Is content-construct validity, tet-retest reliablity applied to this?


  • 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?

    NA


  • Other Comments:

    Good work, clear objectives, structured methodology, followed by clear discussion and apt references with respect to the results obtained.

  • 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:

    Worked on many Medical education projects related to learning techniques, student assessment. Presented these works at National and International conferences.

  • How to cite:  Dutt. R A .Review on - The Effects of Early Clinical Exposure On Medical Laboratory Technology Students: Its effect on Internship Period and their professional Carrier[Review of the article 'The Effects of Early Clinical Exposure On Medical Laboratory Technology Students: Its effect on Internship Period and their professional Carrier ' by Imamwerdi B].WebmedCentral 2013;4(1):WMCRW002466
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse