Submited on: 12 Sep 2015 05:04:16 AM GMT
Published on: 14 Sep 2015 09:27:26 AM GMT
Deficient sample size to come up with a meaningful conclusion
Posted by Dr. Nassir A Azimi on 06 Mar 2017 07:33:42 AM GMT Reviewed by Author Invited Reviewers

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

    The title of the article summarizes the main claim from the paper

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

    Yes, However while the null hypothesis is interesting, it would seem intutive that diastolic dysfunction which has correlated with many indeices particularly age would not necessarily explain panic attacks, claustrophobia, etc

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

    Loosely, yes.

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

    Based on a small sample size (n=40), I am not sure one can make wider generalization about entities that intuitively would be maltifactorial

  • 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?


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?


  • 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?

    A larger scale application may be needed to validate the findings, however, one would expect from the general understanding of the entities studies that the multifactorial natire would leave tool many variables to be corrected.

  • 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?

    while interesting, I do not see any greater value than having it published online as support for those woundering about the above entities

  • Other Comments:


  • 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:


  • How to cite:  Azimi N A.Deficient sample size to come up with a meaningful conclusion[Review of the article 'Claustrophobia, Panic Attacks and Caffeine Intolerance may NOT be associated with Diastolic Dysfunction: A Pre-Echocardiogram Questionnaire-Based Pilot Study ' by Mazumdar A].WebmedCentral 2017;8(3):WMCRW003360
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse