-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The manuscript is based on review only. There is no research so, there are no claims of the paper
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
There is no novelty and originality in the content. There is a huge amount of plagiarism contained in this manuscript.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
The credit should be given to the original articles from where copy and paste has been done like a review entitled "Ancient-Modern Concordance in Ayurvedic Plants: Some Examples" published in Environ Health Perspect 1999. Etc.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No
-
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?
The paper does not offer enough detail on the topic
-
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?
The manuscript can be more interesting by adding following points in the manuscript: 1. A brief introduction of various traditional systems of medicines like for Homeopathy: Homeopathic medicines are high dilutions; Liquid homeopathic remedies can contain alcohol and are permitted to have higher levels of alcohol than conventional drugs for adults. 2. Examples of Medicinal and aromatic plants and their parts exported from India and importing medicinal plants, their therapeutic uses in indigenous systems of Indian traditional system of medicines can be included in the manuscript to make it more interesting. 3. Current laws and regulations for standardization of crude drugs in traditional system of medicine. 4. Applications of Traditional Medicine in Drug Development like liposomes, phytosomes etc. 5. Standardization and quality control of traditional medicines. 6. Protection of traditional medicine as intellectual property by giving some interesting examples like Turmeric (Curcuma longa) etc. 7. Examples of siddha plants used in some specific diseases (botanical name, siddha name and therapeutic uses) 8. A brief account on U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulation of homeopathic remedies. 9. Possible Side Effects and Risks of homeopathic remedies. 10. Sources of homeopathic remedies.
-
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 manuscript is not containing complete informations.
-
Other Comments:
There are some grammatical errors. There is no proper referencing style. WebmedCentral should make general guidelines for preparing manuscripts.
-
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:
7 Years in development of controlled drug delivery systems
- How to cite: Awasthi R .Traditional Systems of Medicine - Now and Forever[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW002004
Responded by Mr. Rajeev K Singla on 04 Jul 2012 03:00:42 AM
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The paper describes four unique traditional systems of medicine and challenges to their widespread adoption.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
The discussion is not novel, but a nice overview/summary.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Literature is not adequately or properly cited. Claims are fairly general.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
Not applicable since this is a review article.
-
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 since this is a review article.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not applicable since this is a review article.
-
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?
Not applicable since this is a review article.
-
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 applicable since this is a review article.
-
Other Comments:
The discussion should be more in-depth. For example, the authors have provided history of these systems of medicine but not necessarily explained their central tenet with clarity and depth.
-
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:
Published in the field of drug delivery.
- How to cite: Anonymous.Review[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001977
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The authors have claimed the need and importance of traditional systems of Medicine. With reference to the basic concepts of use of Traditonal sytems of medicine, this compilation of data and review on challenges to this traditional system may put some eye opening informations to researchers working in this field.
This article may serve a platform for researhers working on alternative medicines, Herbal Medicine formulations and development.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
There is some novel information prresented here.
-
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
-
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 of controlled trials mentioned here.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
To some extent the method for compilation of data is suffcient enough for understanding the traditional system of medicie.
-
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?
More details on reports suggesting use of traditional sytem of medicine in present scenario and in future need to be presented with exaples of some traditional formulations, for better knowledge and under standing of the redears.
-
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 paper may be presented in a seminar to serve as a preliminary information basis for the redears. If This paper can be added with more informations on practice of Traditional system of medicine it would serve better.
-
Other Comments:
Referencing sytem of this paper need to be improved. Most of the references are web based searches.
i suggest to the authours to add some more literatures and refernces of articles and papers in this field.
Authors may follow some standar information publications on Ayrveda and Suddha system of medicine and collect resources and publications on practice of Ayurveda/Traditional systems of medicine.
-
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:
6 years
- How to cite: Choudhury P K.Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001958
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Authors presented a review article which basically gives a general idea about folklore and alternative medicines in India.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
The review's content lacks novelty and originality. In fact, I am concerned about the huge amount of plagiarism contained in that review. Importantly, credit should be given to a review entitled "Ancient-Modern Concordance in Ayurvedic Plants: Some Examples" published in Environ Health Perspect 1999. Authors of the current review must use their own phrasing to express their ideas. In addition, the present work is neither comprehensive nor detailed. Analogously, authors of the current work used a whole paragraph from a WHO document without changing a word!
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Previous literature should be properly cited as mentioned above. Actually, authors just copied and pasted the content of their review from folklore medicine websites and previous reviews.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
N/A
-
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?
N/A
-
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?
Authors need to thoroughly review the literature and adequately gather information in their own language in a comprehensive manner.
-
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 review is extremely weak and did not provide any advancement of knowledge.
-
Other Comments:
The language and style used by authors is mostly non-scientific. Also, there are some grammatical and linguistic error. I recommend that WebmedCentral highlights the general guidelines governing publishing and emphasizes on the ethical guidelines, especially plagiarism. Moreover, I suggest providing analytical tools to detect such behavior in order to protect the integrity and quality of publishing in this medium.
-
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:
Pharmaceutical Sciences
- How to cite: Anonymous.Reviewer's Comments on Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001955
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The work claims the traditional medicine and health care system in ayurveda, siddha, unani and homeopathy etc. However, being a review article much more information on the above topics is needed to included. The authors have given an overview of above systems, which is not sufficient.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
Yes. But this not a sufficient material to be included as a review article. Generally the review article requires more information, but only limited information are dealt with.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes, but it is insufficient.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No comments.
-
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, it shall be prepared as a mini review paper or short review.
-
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?
The authors have to collect more and relevant informations and appropriately placed in order.
-
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. As discussed above with same informations.
-
Other Comments:
The paper needs more informations, preferably from the published papers, most of the references are seems to be obtained through website.
-
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 peer reviewed certain papers on the pharmacognosy with similar subject.
- How to cite: Anonymous.Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever [Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001953
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
The posted article has provided information regarding the various traditional systems of medicine
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
The author has provided true facts about the various traditional systems of medicine
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Claims are properly placed
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
It would have been more lucid if the author could have provided some examples on Patient safety and use. As this information will help researchers woking on herbal medicines to be more careful in choosing a particular herb, and standardizing the parts used in their 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?
NA
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Author can cite some more cases and examples
-
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?
NA
-
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:
Drafting of the article is quite clear
-
Competing interests:
0
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
Yes
-
References:
Evaluation of Antioxidant Activity of Ocimum canum Hydro-alcoholic Leaf Extract in the Prevention of Hepatic Ischaemia
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Behera S .Traditional Systems of Medicine[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001952
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Authors are unable to address the importance of traditional medicine or alternative medicine properly.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
No
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
The paper is very superficially and casually written.
-
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
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not Applicabe
-
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?
NA
-
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:
-
-
Competing interests:
No
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
Yes
-
References:
1. Wadegaonkar V.P. and Wadegaonkar P.A. (2012). Withaferin A targets apoptosis inhibitor cIAP1: A potential anticancer candidate. Journal of Applied Pharmaceutical Science 2(3), 154-157. DOI 10.7324/JAPS.2012.2527
2. Jaiswal J.V. & Wadegaonkar P.A. & Hajare S.W. (2012). The Bioflavonoid Galangin Suppresses the Growth of Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma in Swiss Albino Mice: A Molecular Insight. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. DOI 10.1007/s12010-012-9646-3
3. Deshmukh S.R., Wadegaonkar V.P., Bhagat R.P. and Wadegaonkar P.A. (2011). Tissue specific expression of Anthraquinones, flavonoids and phenolics in leaf, fruit and root suspension cultures of Indian Mulberry (Morinda citrifola L.). Plant Omics Journal 4(1), 6-13.
4. Deshmukh S.R., Solomon Habtemarium and Wadegaonkar P.A. (2010). Antioxidant and Antiproliferative Activity of Root Suspension Culture of Morinda citrifolia L. Research J. Pharm and Tech. 3(4), 470-473 -
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Anonymous.Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever [Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001951
-
Other Comments:
Article is very vague and broadbased.
Figures are not substantiated by any trials / studies.
There are no illustrations and graphs.
-
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 an otolaryngologist.
- How to cite: Thiagarajan B .Traditional systems of medicine Now and forever[Review of the article 'Traditional Systems of Medicine- Now & Forever ' by Singla R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001740
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
The authors claim the importance of traditional medicines' involvement in regular healthcare. They discuss about their merits, regulations, limitations, efficacy, and sustainability in the market
The claims are not novel. People who have been associated with tranditional medicines have been claming about their efficacy and benefits over modern medicines for years. Their ancient existence make them traditional medicines. There is no as such novel claim in their potency as an alternative medicines
As the text flows from one topic to the other claims are placed appropriately.
Their claims could have been supported if they had proposed the specific areas where these practises are followed in their true knowledge. For e.g. Auyurveda in Kerala.
There is no as such study in this paper
There is no as such study in this paper
They should have proposed the real problem alternative medicines are facing as compared to modern medicines in more detail. The problems like the standardization and validation of contents of alternative medicines to as much extent as they can.
No this paper is not an outstanding, because the claims were not supported by much evidences
NA
No I don't any conflict of interests
No
No
None
I am a pharmacist and I have studied alternative medicines in detail