Submited on: 28 Jan 2015 11:15:58 PM GMT
Published on: 29 Jan 2015 12:27:41 PM GMT
 

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

    That the presentation of an abruption usually does not have all of the classic signs and that the health care provider needs to have a high index of suspicion if a patient presents with any of the classic signs, bleeding, hypertonus and abdominal pain. Additionally many of the patients will not have any identifiable risk factors.


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

    These claims are not novel and many investigators have reported that not all of  the classic symptoms or an abruption are present upon presentation.


  • 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?

    NA


  • 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?

    Looking in the literature to determine the frequency of each one of the classic featues of a placental abruption to determine how frequenlty these features are present when the patient first presents. Could also look at what risk factors are present in pregnancies when the diagnosis is contrimed. 


  • 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 new information is presented


  • Other Comments:

    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:

    Division and Fellowship Director for MFM

  • How to cite:  Magann E F.Would delete the Atypical from the title, since most placental abruptions do not have all of the classical signs.[Review of the article 'Atypical Placement Abruption: Clinical suspicion and management ' by Fernandez A].WebmedCentral 2015;6(2):WMCRW003182
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse