Submited on: 29 Feb 2012 08:35:18 AM GMT
Published on: 01 Mar 2012 10:23:53 AM GMT
 
Very interesting artcle
Posted by Prof. Pietro G Calo on 28 Apr 2012 01:45:33 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? No
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:

    This a very intesting article. The case is well written and the argument is very relevant. The recommendations addressed to young surgeons are suitable and the the difficulties in diagnosis are correctly underlined.

  • 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:

    Good

  • How to cite:  Calo P G.Very interesting artcle[Review of the article 'The Stump Appendicitis: A Warning Still Actual ' by Pavesi E].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001744
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse