Submited on: 09 Nov 2015 01:39:27 PM GMT
Published on: 10 Nov 2015 08:43:08 AM GMT
 

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

    On my opinion the main claim of the paper and the main theory of the author is: UTS may be locomotor evolution in reverse


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

    The syndrome is named according to author name. The claims are novel.


  • 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?

    The results support the claims.


  • 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?

    it is not any randomised control trial prescribed at the methods of the study. The syndorme is rare and the patients are part of some well defined families included in the study.


  • 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?

    The paper is continuing some other studies/papers authored by Professor Tan previously.


  • 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?

    Yes it is outstanding and it will be a pleasure to include it at our presentations. The main value is its originality.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    .
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    .

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    .

  • How to cite:  Kruja J .Gait analysis in Uner Tan syndrome cases with key symptoms of quadrupedal locomotion, mental impairment and dysarthric or no speech.[Review of the article 'Gait Analysis in Uner Tan Syndrome Cases with Key Symptoms of Quadrupedal Locomotion, Mental Impairment, and Dysarthric or No Speech ' by Tan U].WebmedCentral 2015;6(12):WMCRW003261
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Peer-review of Gait Analysis in Uner Tan Syndrome Cases
Posted by Dr. Sanjoy Sanyal on 14 Nov 2015 03:06:43 AM GMT Reviewed by Author Invited Reviewers

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

    (i) Do the UTS cases use LS and/or DS walking gait?;

    (ii) How might the locomotion of UTS cases be related to that of nonhuman primates?

    (iii) Are the UTS cases examples of a locomotor evolution in reverse


    The main claims of the paper are: 


    1. UTS cases walk with straight rather than flexed legs

    2. QL in UTS is mostly lateral sequence,

    3. There are similarities in gait characteristics with terrestrial primate locomotion

    4. QL in healthy individuals had similarities with arboreal primate locomotion.

    5. UTS may be locomotor evolution in reverse


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

    Yes, all claims are novel


  • 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, except the last claim (reverse evolution)


  • 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. Only 32 members from 10 families were studied


  • 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?

    MRI of head of UTS, normal humans, terrestrial primates and arboreal primates would have added to the quality of paper.

     

    Comparison of the Cerebellum and Basal Ganglia of each of these would have thrown more light.

     

    It is known that several cases of UTS have inferior Cerebello-vermian hypoplasia. It is quite possible that this was responsible for the posture and gait of UTS, rather than any 'reverse evolution'


  • 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?

    Quite outstanding paper, from an evolutionary biologist's point of view but less so from a Neuroscientist's point of view


  • Other Comments:

    Uner Tan himself being a evolutionary biologist, he focussed more on comparative analysis of primates and humans and UTS cases. 

     

    From a Neuroscience perspective a comparison of the brain scans of these subjects would have been more informative.

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

    I have published nearly 100 dissection videos of Cerebellum, Cerebrum, Basal Ganglia on Web-based media (YouTube, Slideshare Behance, MERLOT)

  • How to cite:  Sanyal S .Peer-review of Gait Analysis in Uner Tan Syndrome Cases [Review of the article 'Gait Analysis in Uner Tan Syndrome Cases with Key Symptoms of Quadrupedal Locomotion, Mental Impairment, and Dysarthric or No Speech ' by Tan U].WebmedCentral 2015;6(11):WMCRW003259
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse