Submited on: 04 Jun 2012 07:53:53 PM GMT
Published on: 05 Jun 2012 01:44:52 PM GMT
 

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

    Simple study but showed a new results


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

    Yes 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?

    NA


  • 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?

    Regaded as research article not clinical trail


  • 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?

    Study logarith of bacterial  growth to identify the mode of action


  • 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?

    No


  • Other Comments:

    No

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • 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:

    Yes

  • How to cite:  Dullen G .Evaluation the Antibacterial Activity Of Aniseed: In Vitro Study [Review of the article 'Evaluation the Antibacterial Activity Of Aniseed: In Vitro Study ' by Alkuraishy H].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001898
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse