Home » Reviews
Scaphoid Fractures- Anatomy And Diagnosis: A Systemic Review Of Literature
By Dr. Dharm Meena , Dr. Sameer Aggarwal , Dr. Kamal Bali , Dr. Vishal Kumar
Submited on: 06 Dec 2010 05:48:55 PM GMT
Published on: 07 Dec 2010 09:34:45 PM GMT
 
Scaphoid Fractures
Posted by Dr. Naveen Tahasildar on 08 Dec 2010 02:49:18 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? 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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    A good review of literature covering various aspects of this interesting fracture....

  • 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:

    We treat a large number of these injuries at our centre (being a tertiary care institute)....

  • How to cite:  Tahasildar N .Scaphoid Fractures[Review of the article 'Scaphoid Fractures- Anatomy And Diagnosis: A Systemic Review Of Literature ' by Kumar V].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00209
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

Previous Version:

Scaphoid Fractures- Anatomy And Diagnosis: A Systemic Review Of Literature

Critical appraisal
Posted by Dr. William Kent on 09 Jun 2011 09:50:15 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? No
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? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    Poor article.

    The methodology employed is not explained. Subjects? inclusion/exclusion criteria for papers used? search strategy? How was evidence systematically reviewed? Assessment of included studies quality? Strengths and weaknesses of included studies? Further questions and research required?

    This paper can not claim to be a systematic review as it currently reported. The quality of the conclusions can not be evaluated, thus its findings do not add to the current body of knowledge.

  • 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:

    Orthopaedic junior doctor and sports scientist

  • How to cite:  Kent W .Critical appraisal[Review of the article 'Scaphoid Fractures- Anatomy And Diagnosis: A Systemic Review Of Literature ' by Kumar V].WebmedCentral 2010;2(6):WMCRW00814
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
comment
Posted by Dr. Kamal Bali on 05 Dec 2010 05:07:48 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? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
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? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Please include the references in the text

  • 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:

    yes

  • How to cite:  Bali K .comment[Review of the article 'Scaphoid Fractures- Anatomy And Diagnosis: A Systemic Review Of Literature ' by Kumar V].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00195
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.