Submited on: 05 Sep 2012 06:41:16 AM GMT
Published on: 05 Sep 2012 07:19:00 PM GMT
 
Prevention of Asthma in Children
Posted by Dr. Amitav Banerjee on 03 Oct 2012 03:25:10 PM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    It is a straightforward review article with no claim to original work. 


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    No and not applicable in a review article


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Not applicable


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Not applicable


  • 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?

    Even review articles should include a methodology section describing the methods used for locating, selecting, extracting, and synthesizing the information, the search engines used (PubMed, Google Scholar, EmBase, etc), the MeSH terms employed in the search and so on. The present paper does not mention any of these. 


  • 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 completely ignored the role of genetic factors in the etiology of childhood asthma. Same may assume importance as a preventive strategy of the future. The authors may go through the paper by Bracken et al entitled "Genetic and Perinatal riks factors for asthma onset and severitgy: A review and theoretical analysis," published in Epidemiologic Reviews 2002; 24; 2; 176 - 189. doi 10.1093/epirev/mxf012


  • 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 exactly outstanding. Well known facts about childhood asthma have been repeated. 


  • 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:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Have been on panel of reviewers of medical journals. Have reviewed similar papers in the past as reviewer. Presently Editor in Chief, Medical Journal of Dr D Y Patil University, Pune, India.

  • How to cite:  Banerjee A .Prevention of Asthma in Children[Review of the article 'Prevention Of Asthma In Children ' by Shahid S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(10):WMCRW002272
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Dr. Amitav Banerjee, Thanks for your kind review. It is valuable. I shall add the suggestions of genetics role in asthma and strategies for its prevention in the revised manuscript. TQ Best rgds Dr. Shahid S.
Responded by Dr. Sukhbir Shahid on 05 Oct 2012 05:18:50 AM
Prevention of asthma in children
Posted by Dr. Devesh Oberoi on 03 Oct 2012 05:02:09 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    1. Etiology of asthma is multifactorial.

    2. Asthma exerts an economic burden on the society

    3.Asthma symptoms can be prevented and reversed.  


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    The claims are not novel. This paper is a narrative review on the preventive aspects of asthma from the existing literature.


  • 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. But there should be more references to support some of the claims. For instance, under the heading, " introduction" "clinical phenotypes of childhood asthma" the author should add few more good references.


  • 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?

    There was no protocol required.


  • 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?

    As previously mentioned, the author should expand the list of references in the introduction, and in other highleghted sections.


  • 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?

    It is a decent piece of work.


  • 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:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have worked in the field of respiratory medicine as a clinican as well as researcher.

  • How to cite:  Oberoi D .Prevention of asthma in children[Review of the article 'Prevention Of Asthma In Children ' by Shahid S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(10):WMCRW002271
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Dr. Devesh Oberoi, Thanks for the kind review. I shall incorporate the suggestions in the updated version especially the addition of more references. TQ Best regards Dr. Shahid S.
Responded by Dr. Sukhbir Shahid on 05 Oct 2012 05:17:32 AM
Confusing Risk Factors with Causation
Posted by Anonymous Reviewer on 03 Oct 2012 01:57:15 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    This is a review that is fairly complete on the topic of asthma focusing primarily on public health as opposed to management of individual patients.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    No. This is a review paper and as such synthesizes data.


  • 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?

    NA


  • 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?

    NA


  • 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?

    This is a good paper but it would be easier to read if the formating was better to include more bullet points and tables.


  • Other Comments:

    The authors state that poverty has been implicated in causation of asthma. The authors are confusing risk factors with causative factors. The lack of money does not cause asthma, it is what the lack of money is associated with, and these other factors may be "causative" of asthma. This is a very fundamental issue and mixing the two up in this paper is a major issue. I recommend this be changed.

  • 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:

    Board certified family physician

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.Confusing Risk Factors with Causation[Review of the article 'Prevention Of Asthma In Children ' by Shahid S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(10):WMCRW002269
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Dr. Thomas F Heston, Thanks for your suggestions and review of my article. The point raised would be addressed in my revised ms best rgds Dr. Shahid S.
Responded by Dr. Sukhbir Shahid on 04 Oct 2012 05:17:55 AM

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Asthma triggers if eliminated partially may reduce disease symptoms completely.

    Some asthma-inducing in the environment can be contraindicated by others.

    Asthma can be managed and symptoms reduced.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    They are not novel, nor did the author imply that they were since each claim was precisely referenced from peer-review literature.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes! One-hundred-forty-three times in proper order.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes, though it could be argued that this researcher has either overlapping claims or some of the cited literature contradicts others.


  • 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, methodology is valid and rationally presented.


  • 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 research could have been examined to compare Asthma indications (or IgE-levels) in children weaned at 6-months compared to weaned at 1-year compared to weaned at 1.5 years compared to weaned at 2-years. Each of these time-weaned-at stages would require graduated adding solid food versus adding solid foods immediately to identify the effects of each on Immune system IgE-allergen reactions.


  • 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?

    It is outstanding in the general view of reducing and/or preventing Asthma in children who live in humid climates where environmental allergen counts are high.


  • Other Comments:

    I have no more comments.

  • Competing interests:
    None.
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have performed anti-histamine experiments in vivo on human subjects suffering from chronic allergen-induced symptoms. These experiments have not been published.

  • How to cite:  Misner B .Prevention of Asthma in Children (Prior to Becoming Adults)[Review of the article 'Prevention Of Asthma In Children ' by Shahid S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(9):WMCRW002221
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Dr. Bill Misner, Thanks for your review. It is quite useful going through the details of your review. The points are well taken and the suggestions would be used for refining the article. TQ again Best regards Dr. Shahid SK
Responded by Dr. Sukhbir Shahid on 07 Sep 2012 05:49:44 AM