Home » Reviews
Impacted Maxillary Canines: Frequency in a Brazilian population
By Ms. Ana Carolina Junqueira Da Silva , Ms. Caroline Cruz De Morais , Prof. Maria Dorotea Neves Cury , Prof. Sergio E Vieira Cury
Submited on: 13 Nov 2013 08:46:56 PM GMT
Published on: 14 Nov 2013 11:53:50 AM GMT
 
Impacted Maxillary Canines: Frequency in a Brazilian population
Posted by Dr. Nooshin Bagherani on 15 Nov 2013 09:04:31 AM GMT Reviewed by WMC Editors

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

    In this paper, the frequency (incidence?) of impacted maxillary canines was studied in Brazilian population by observing 3,540 panoramic radiographies. The findings of this study were correspondent to the similar studies done by other authors. Regarding the method of case selection in this study, the results cannot be popularized to the whole Brazilian population. Moreover, when findings of a study are invaluable and beneficial, that they could suggest a guideline appropriate and effective in treating and preferentially in preventing a problem in mankind. Then, only giving statistical information particularly when have been done before by others, is not beneficial.


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

    No, it is not novel. As mentioned in the paper, there are studies similar done by others.


  • 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?

    No.


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

    Regarding the method of case selection in this study, the results cannot be popularized to the whole Brazilian population.


  • 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 manuscript could be better, if:

    1. The assessing of the radiographies was admixed with clinical examination.
    2. The cause(s) of the problem was evaluated in this study.
    3. A guideline appropriate and effective for treating or preferentially preventing this oral disorder in patients.


  • 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?

    If the complementary information is added to the paper, it will be very invaluable for presenting in a seminar.


  • Other Comments:

    Nill

  • 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:

    None

  • How to cite:  Bagherani N .Impacted Maxillary Canines: Frequency in a Brazilian population [Review of the article 'Impacted Maxillary Canines: Frequency in a Brazilian population ' by Vieira Cury S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(11):WMCRW002890
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
 
 
We use cookies on this website to measure and improve performance. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.