Submited on: 31 Dec 2011 03:54:29 PM GMT
Published on: 01 Jan 2012 10:52:08 AM GMT
 
reconsider after revision
Posted by Dr. Yufeng Zhou on 11 Apr 2012 08:10:07 AM 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? 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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Authors measured the compression failure of porous PMMA by increasing the concentration of sucrose. The study is quite interesting. After revision according to the comments below, it could be published in webmedcentral.

    General comments:

    The figures are hard to see.

    Introduction does not clearly show why authors want to do such an investigation.

    Explanation of the experimental result is preferred.

    Elution characteristics of different porous PMMA cements should also be included.

    Revise the manuscript, some parts are not clear.

  • 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:

    research on porous media

  • How to cite:  Zhou Y .reconsider after revision[Review of the article 'Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study ' by Lindeman R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001672
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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:

    Some of the headings are not inplace and the spacing is not adequate.

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

    Nanotechnology

  • How to cite:  Alubaidy A .Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study[Review of the article 'Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study ' by Lindeman R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001642
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? 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? 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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    In the introduction, authors should clearly identiy the novelty of this work. In addition, authors should describe why the composite materials were selected for this study and how they would be useful for biomedical applications.

     

    Authors should describe cross-head speed or strain rate for the mechanical tests in the methods.

     

    Is it possible to provide the porosity data that is important for this study?

     

    In fact, the residual stresses of polymer materials should be removed before any mechanical tests since the residual stress significantly affects the mechanical strengths of the samples.  

     

    Authors should define "n" and "p' before using as nomenclatures.

     

    Although authors have optimized the samples for the mechanical propertiess, they should further identify the usefulness of the optimized samples for biomedical applications by testing their biomedical properties as reported in the introduction. 

  • 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:

    Biomedical Engineering (Materials Science and Engineering)

  • How to cite:  Oo K .Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study[Review of the article 'Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study ' by Lindeman R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001631
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? 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? 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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The author presents an experimental research entitled "Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study".

    The study produces results that could be interesting in the engineering and medical application. However there are some small concerns that could be added to improve the quality of the paper itself.

    The author use different percentage of composition 0%, 11.1%, 20%, … but they did not explain why they use these specific values (and, for instance, not  rounded values).

     The author did not mention the time for the storage at 4 degree and for the mixing procedure. Is it comparable between the specimens? In my opinion they need to mention it and if it is not similar justify how the results could be still consider valid and/or add it in the limitation of the study.

    They author wrote that they analyze one population of 27 specimens (0%) while all the others are in the order of 40-45 samples. Is it a typographic error? If not I would ask the author to comment this difference in the sample size population.

    In my opinion a generic stress strain curve on a generic specimen could improve the paper quality.

    In the discussion they mention a statistical comparison, it is not clear if the author use a multiple-comparison correction (as Bonferroni) comparing different population. If not I would suggest to recheck and add this correction in the data analysis.

     

    From an editorial point of view:

    -          References 1 and 2 are in German, it is not possible to find similar articles in English?

    -          I would also add reference 11 at the end of the introduction;

    -          I would use apex for the reference numbers;

    -          I would add the word “cylindrical” when the authors describe the specimen shape.

     

  • 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:

    I am author/coauthor of a number of international papers on the biomedical engineering field also involving material properties/testing.

  • How to cite:  Innocenti B .Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study [Review of the article 'Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study ' by Lindeman R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001624
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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:

    The submitted paper is an original experimental research on "Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study". I believe the publication of the submitted paper may be beneficial for the academic and medical sides.

  • 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:

    I have a number of international papers on the mechanical properies of polymers and metalic materials.

  • How to cite:  Findik F .Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study[Review of the article 'Compression Failure Analysis of Porous Pmma - A Pilot Study ' by Lindeman R].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001598
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse