Submited on: 07 Nov 2011 01:09:24 PM GMT
Published on: 08 Nov 2011 03:42:34 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? 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? No
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: 2. This is a very interesting work, but the study population is way too small for any meaningful conclusions to be drawn. 6. A larger cohort (say a minimum of 10 patients) would increase the value of this paper in terms of validity of the findings.
  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    Practicing urologist in a university teaching hospital setting
  • How to cite:  Essiet A .Review of Omalizumab and interstitial cystitis/Bladder pain paper[Review of the article 'Results of Omalizumab in Bladder Pain Syndrome/Interstitial Cystitis (BPS/IC) ' by Rovereto B].WebmedCentral 2011;2(11):WMCRW001114
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse