Submited on: 28 Mar 2011 11:03:49 PM GMT
Published on: 30 Mar 2011 10:39:41 AM 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? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
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? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Thank you for the explaination regarding confidentiality.

    I been unable to edit the previous review so please accept this score.

  • Competing interests:
    revised score in light of the authors comments
  • 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:

    I have worked in orthopaedics for several years

  • How to cite:  Manning S R.revised score in light of the authors comments[Review of the article 'Bilateral Type 1 Radial Head Fractures in a Volleyball Player ' by Hafeez A].WebmedCentral 2011;2(7):WMCRW00844
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Partly
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? Yes
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? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    I THINK THE TITLE OF THE PAPER SHOULD HAVE THE TERM 'FRACTURE' AND NOT 'FRACTURES'.

     

    THE PAPER NEEDS A MESSAGE TO GO ALONG WITH WHAT IS DESCRIBED.

     

    THE MECHANISM OF TRAUMA DESCRIBING ITS OCCURENCE IN A VOLLEYBALL PLAYER SHOULD BE MENTIONED TO WARRANT THE TERM VOLLEYBALL PLAYER IN THE TITLE.

     

    SPECIFIC RADIAL HEAD VIEWS SHOULD BE SHOWN.

     

    THE DISCUSSION IS QUITE LONG AND WELL WRITTEN BUT NEEDS TO BE TAILORED TO THE UNIQUENESS OF BILATERAL OCCURENCE.

     

    PATIENT CONFIDENTIALITY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROTECTED ON THE RADIOGRAPH AND IN CASE THE PATIENT WISHED HIS NAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SECTION.

  • 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:

    I HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE IN OPERATING ON THESE FRACTURES.

  • How to cite:  Dhar S .Bilateral Type 1 Radial Head Fracture in a Volleyball Player[Review of the article 'Bilateral Type 1 Radial Head Fractures in a Volleyball Player ' by Hafeez A].WebmedCentral 2011;2(6):WMCRW00792
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
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? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This is an interesting type of injury and the point is well made that a distracting injury may lead to a missed bilateral injury. The point that the patient required care from his family with his ADL's is also well made. It is often forgotten that bilateral upper limb injuries will place a heavy burden upon the family or the health service if the patient needs hospital admission.

    I found the radiograph images small and difficult to see clearly but more concerning is that I think I can identify the patients name from the radiograph. This should have been annonymised prior to submission and would be a concern if this was submitted for publication elsewhere. I would suggest that the authors ammend this as soon as possible. I would be happy to provide a further review with an alternate score when the radiographs are annonymised.

  • 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:

    I have worked for several years in trauma and orhtopaedics. I have also worked in accident and emergency medicine.

  • How to cite:  Manning S R.Review of Bilateral type 1 Radial Head Fractures in a Volleyball Player[Review of the article 'Bilateral Type 1 Radial Head Fractures in a Volleyball Player ' by Hafeez A].WebmedCentral 2011;2(5):WMCRW00750
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Sir Thank you so much for the review. The radiograph was uploaded with the full consent of the patient, a copy of which is with me, and he wanted to be mentioned in the manuscript or figures, hence the name! Please do go ahead with the score and keep on reviewing.
Responded by Dr. Nasir Muzaffar on 19 May 2011 12:30:52 PM