Home » Reviews
A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor
By Prof. Tae-Hee Kim , Prof. Hae-hyeog Lee , Prof. Soo-ho Chung , Dr. Wooseok Lee
Submited on: 25 Apr 2012 07:25:04 AM GMT
Published on: 25 Apr 2012 12:50:22 PM GMT
 
A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor
Posted by Prof. Dong-Su Jeon on 04 May 2012 02:40:25 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? 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? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    No refernece is mentioned.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • 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:  Jeon D .A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor[Review of the article 'A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor ' by Lee W].WebmedCentral 2012;3(5):WMCRW001774
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
What caused the black stools
Posted by Ms. Judy S Cohain on 29 Apr 2012 03:43:39 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? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
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? Yes
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? No
  • Other Comments:

    What caused the black stools?

    How could this wrong diagnosis be prevented in the future?

  • 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:

    Midwife

  • How to cite:  Cohain J S.What caused the black stools[Review of the article 'A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor ' by Lee W].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001746
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor
Posted by Mr. Govind N Purohit on 28 Apr 2012 09:12:53 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? No
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? 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? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    This manuscript is simply an abstract of a single case report. The Case report does not have the components of a short communication as the MS does not have abstract, introduction, materials and methods and results and discussion. Even no reference is mentioned. The manuscript is thus not at all written as a scientific paper.

  • 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:

    NIL

  • How to cite:  Purohit G N.A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor [Review of the article 'A Ruptured Old Ectopic Pregnancy that was Suspicious for Tumor ' by Lee W].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001743
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.