Home » Reviews
Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma
By Dr. Prashant Kothari
Submited on: 21 Jan 2012 07:16:52 AM GMT
Published on: 21 Jan 2012 05:11:00 PM GMT
 
Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma
Posted by Dr. William J Maloney on 05 Feb 2014 11:10:53 PM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

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

    The aim of the author is to present the radiographic appearance of ameloblastoma.  Ameloblastoma is a benign odontogenic tumor usually located in the jaw bone.  The lesions are classically multilocular with a honeycomb appearance.  80% of ameloblastomas occur in the mandible.


  • 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?

    No


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

    Yes


  • 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


  • 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- This would make for a great seminar at a dental school.


  • Other Comments:

    Ameloblastoma is a benign odontogenic tumor usually located in the jaw bone.  The lesions are classically multilocular with a honeycomb appearance.  80% of ameloblastomas occur in the mandible.

    It is common for ameloblastomas to recur after inadequate surgical removal.  Very helpful and informative radiographs are provided.

    This would make for a great seminar at a dental school.

  • 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:

    Clinical associate professor

  • How to cite:  Maloney W J.Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma[Review of the article 'Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma ' by Kothari P].WebmedCentral 2014;5(2):WMCRW002946
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
An example of article.
Posted by Dr. Constantino Ledesma-Montes on 12 Feb 2012 08:37:54 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? No
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
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? No
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    Replying to the invitation to review this manuscript I like to express the following.

    1. No data  is icluded in this manuscript. It makes it unusefull for readers.

    2. It is not an original contribution because there are lots of well documented ameloblastoma cases and it is an example of a poorly documented reported case.

    3. Manuscipt structure is completely wrong it has no structure.

    4. This manuscript has no academic or scientific value.

    5. It has some errors and mistake in this language.

    6. Radiographs are OK, photomicrographs are missing. Diagnosis is not supported.

    7. References are very old.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Mosqueda-Taylor A, Ledesma-Montes C, Caballero-Sandoval S, Portilla-Robertson J, Ruíz-Godoy LM, Meneses-García A. Odontogenic tumors in México. A collaborative retrospective study of 349 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;84:672-5. Ledesma-Montes C, Garcés-Ortíz M, Ibarra-Villanueva A, Portilla-Robertson J, Hernández-Guerrero JC. Ameloblastoma in Latin America. Analysis of 338 cases. Medicina Oral 2000;5:254-60.
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have numerous studies on odontognic tumorur and I am one of the authors in the 2005 WHO Bliue Book on Head and Neck Tumours.

  • How to cite:  Ledesma-Montes C .An example of article.[Review of the article 'Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma ' by Kothari P].WebmedCentral 2014;3(2):WMCRW001483
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Ameloblastoma
Posted by Prof. Izzet Yavuz on 23 Jan 2012 02:27:31 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? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
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? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? No
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma 

     The subject of the article not giving new and original contribution  to the dental field.

    References is too less and too old, that section should be revise with more and latest references.

    The value of this paper for an international audience can be medium level after the revisions.

  • 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:

    -

  • How to cite:  Yavuz I .Ameloblastoma[Review of the article 'Radiographic Appearance of Ameloblastoma ' by Kothari P].WebmedCentral 2014;3(1):WMCRW001415
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.