-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The climate is changing and the patterns of disesaes are also channging so the main claim of the author is that there is a relationship between the diseases and climate change which could be prevented by global effort.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No. This paper is a review paper and does not provide sufficient evidence (literature review) to support the claim.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
The claims are not properly palced
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No. it does not. More evidences on effcet of climate change on health problem should be presented.
-
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?
It has no methodology. Review article must also present the methodology such as searching and reviewing strategy.
-
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?
No
-
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
-
Other Comments:
It can be improved by reviewing more articles in a systematic manner and generating supporting evidences to what author wants to claim.
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
Yes
-
References:
Climate change and Malaria in Jhapa district of Nepal: Emerging evidences from Nepal (to be published in next issue of Journal of Nepal Medical College
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Bhandari G P.Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001983
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The article is essentially a review of recent literature (2008-2011) related to climate change, and potential impact on health globally. The main claim is the climate change poses "the greatest challenges to public health in the 21st century". The authors conclude that action from a variety of organizations will be needed to address these challenges.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No; there is an abundance of reports on the potential impact of climate change.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
There is a rather limited number of references provided, as compared to the amount which has been written on the subject.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
This paper does not include any original research.
-
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?
Not applicable.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not applicable.
-
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?
This paper does not include any original research.
-
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. This paper does not include any original research.
-
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:
Medical Director, Public Health - Dayton & Montgomery County
- How to cite: Herchline T .Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001980
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The article is a summary of some literature related to climate change, public health, and developing countries. The main claims are the the effects of climate change impacts public health in developing countries. This is not a new thesis.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No, the claims are not novel. Only 12 articles are included in this review and although the claims are not disputed - they are not novel.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Generally the claims are properly placed. The reference to the British National Health Service are not well developed nor clear.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
This is not a study, but a review - there are no results.
-
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 protocol is provided.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
No methods are provided.
-
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?
Additional critical review of the literature would improved the paper. This should not be difficult to do.
-
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?
This is not an outstanding paper in its discipline. It's a nice overview -but not outstanding and not novel.
-
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?:
Yes
-
References:
Polivka, B et al (2012) Environmental Health Perspectives, 120 (3)
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Anonymous.Global climate change: Implications for Public health in developing countries[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001900
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
This well-written article claims to be a 'study' but it does not present any new data. It might be a review, but with only 12 references it cannot claim to be a review. So, it is a fairly unsupported opinion paper. The 'global PH' in the title is accurate, but really the information provided is generic. The title indicates that the main thrust of the paper is PH implications for developing countries, but the discussion focuses on the British National Health Service (NHS) and the WHO, and it provides generic advice that every country would have to tailor.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Nothing is novel.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
There is no critical review of some articles and many climate change impact areas contain
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
The literature was not extensively examined and the 'results' are too weak to compare with anything. For example, the Lancet article cited about vector-borne diseases and written by modellers is hotly contested by public health entomologists, such as Dr Paul Reiter, who have provided a lot of evidence to show that climate changes in the ranges predicted are likely to have little or no impact on the distribution of many vector-borne diseases.
-
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?
N/A
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
There was no review methodology that was followed.
-
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?
So much would improve this paper - additional articles, critical analysis of impacts, thorough presentation of facts, etc
-
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?
This is a student level paper.
-
Other Comments:
No
-
Competing interests:
No
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
Canyon DV. Aedes aegypti disregard humidity-related climate change. (submitted)
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
16 years of research and lecturing in environmental health, climate change and vector-borne disease
- How to cite: Anonymous.Well-meaning review does not cut it[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001890
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The authors have reviewed the effect of climate change on the global health status. This is definitely an important issue that everyone needs to seriously consider, especially developed nations.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
The authors have not claimed anything new but have reviewed the issue citing references. Though the authors have not extensively quoted previous literature, it does convey the main issue in an effective way
-
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. What the authors state is true in the current scenario.
-
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?
Not applicable
-
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?
There is always scope to quote more previous literature to comprehensively review the topic.
-
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?
Though it is not outstanding, it is neither below par.
-
Other Comments:
The authors conclusions are acceptable especially their last sentence that the developed nations should pay more attention to help the developing and poorer countires is highly important point to note. However I would also comment that the diction is not so good.
-
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:
Not much
- How to cite: Ramadurai G .A Good Review Article[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001888
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The relationship between the effects of changes in the environment and public health, with a particular focus on global warming and developing countries.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No, This is a review article.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
some extent
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No, It has no methodology. Review article must also present the methodology such as searching and reviewing strategy.
-
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?
No, may be improve this paper - additional articles, critical analysis of impacts, thorough presentation of facts, etc
-
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?
may add the critical review of the literature would improved 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?
NA
-
Other Comments:
Authors need to revise the manuscript
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
No
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
NA
- How to cite: Kaewpitoon N .Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries[Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001887
-
Other Comments:
Its a well presented article,good study.
-
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:
12yr
- How to cite: Gilani S A.Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries [Review of the article 'Global Climate Change: Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries ' by Siddiqui M].WebmedCentral 2012;3(5):WMCRW001800
Climate change has impact on public health
No these are not the new. This is a review article and it summarized the public health impacts of cliamte change.
To some extent
No the review does not sufficiently submit evidence.
NA
NA
I have thoroughly commented and put them in "Any other comments" section.
If author can incorporate the comments in the revised version, the articel would add value.
Specific Comments
Authors need to revise the manuscript taking the following comments into consideration:
None
No
No
None
I am not extensively working on this aspect but I have some experiences on this.