Submited on: 15 Nov 2010 09:45:18 PM GMT
Published on: 16 Nov 2010 06:13:19 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? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    I would provide a summary table of the findings on the interviews.  This is an important piece of work which begins to look at natural helper systems following a disaster and their response as a result of being a natural helper.

  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Expertise and previously published on outreach and engagement activities.  Wrote the unpublished manuscript referenced in the article.

  • How to cite:  Allen J B.Original contribution looking at Natural Helping System Response to disaster[Review of the article 'Natural Helpers After The Terrorist Attacks Of September 11 ' by Pruitt D].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00256
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse