-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Claims :
1.Use of natural plant remedies for common ailments like pain / fever
2.To test the efficacy of the extract of leaves
Importance :
Establishment of plant extracts for common ailments forms the basic step in evaluation
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Although use of plant products is encouraging, the pharmacological profile of the extracts need to be established before proceeding further.
-
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?
Pharmacodynamics of the plant extracts along with the complete list of constituents need to be established to add strength to the study.
-
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?
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?
Extract analysis to document the constituents and pharmacodynamics would be useful
-
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?
The study may need to go through further phases to establish the efficacy and safety in human subjects before making any comments
-
Other Comments:
NA
-
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:
Drug potency and quantity evaluation comparing generic and hospital supply in a ICMR project
- How to cite: Anonymous.Animal study of analgesic & antipyretic plant extract[Review of the article 'Investigation of Analgesic & Anti-Pyretic Potentials of Callicarpa Macrophylla Vahl. Leaves Extracts ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001867
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
To prove the use of native botanical drug. It is very important for developing countries to find this type of medicine.
-
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. As far as the knowledge in this kind of subject is new, the work is welcome.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
I think so.
-
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, the work was wll conducted
-
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?
Of course we are waiting for the following paper, using anima nobili.
-
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
-
Other Comments:
I think we should encourage more papers of this kind, especially in developing countries.
-
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 am a medicine professor in a developing country
- How to cite: Bedin V .Investigation of anlgesic &anti-pyretic potencial of Callicarpa Macrophylla Vahl. leaves extracts[Review of the article 'Investigation of Analgesic & Anti-Pyretic Potentials of Callicarpa Macrophylla Vahl. Leaves Extracts ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001863
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
analgesic and antipyretic effect of plant extracts is claimed.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Already many analgesic and antipyretic preparations are avilable and so the need for testing this or advantages of this over some existing preparations has not been clearly stated.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
none
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
For this to be made clear, statisticat tests of significance needs to be applied
Dose response relationship also needs to be established or clearly stated
-
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?
none
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Yes but the concentartion of the active principle in the herbal powder is not established
-
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?
Above mentioned suggestions if incorporated would improve the paper
-
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?
not outstanding but has potential to be good
-
Other Comments:
none
-
Competing interests:
None
-
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:
familiar with epidemiological study designs and with Pharmacognosy
- How to cite: Chacko T V.Investigation of Analgesic & Antipyretic Potentials of Callicarpa Macrophylla Vahl Leaves Extracts[Review of the article 'Investigation of Analgesic & Anti-Pyretic Potentials of Callicarpa Macrophylla Vahl. Leaves Extracts ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001860
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
Article reported the evaluation of Analgesic and Antipyretic Potentials of indigenous plant Callicarpa macrophylla. This report is really worth for the phytochemist as they can now have reason to isolate the active phytoconstituents for the reported activity.
Yes, claims are novel.
In previous literature, no one have scientifically claim analgesic and antipyretic potential of C. macrophylla leaves.
Yes
No, it is not required here now.
Yes, it is scientifically valid.
No, but further research can be certainly encouraged.
Yes, to some extent.
It would like to encourage all the scientists to work more on the natural products as they are structurally more precise and significant for the specific active site of target receptor.
No
Yes
No
None
We have done some significant studies on natural products.