Submited on: 02 Jul 2012 05:37:48 AM GMT
Published on: 03 Jul 2012 04:43:48 PM GMT
 

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

    The main claim of the study was to justify soy and glutamine as effective substrate for enteral nutrition and the demonstrated results support this claim.


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

    Yes. Though glutamine has been known as a conditionally essential amino acid in the management of gastrointestinal disorders, this study has novelty in its approach as it uses surgical patients to prove its efficacy.


  • 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.

    Maintaining a proper nutritional status in surgical patients has a lot of importance to estimate the rate of sucess of these surgeries. In post-operative cases, since the patient completely relies on enteral nutrition, any improvements in the quality of such feeds are mutually beneficial to both the hospital ( sucess in surgical cases) and the patient (improvement in nutritional status and reduced length of stay - a much needed relief for the patient with poor economic conditions but essentially requiring surgery).

    Results adequately support the claim.


  • 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?

    Requires detailed protocol for better understanding


  • 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 study has merit in Medical Nutritional Therapy.However, to aid better understanding of the content, the authors must look into the following:

    1. less use of abbreviations
    2. syntactical and grammatical errors are abudant, therefore content needs editing to avoid confusion
    3. methods of randomisation need clarity
    4. consider numbering the experimental and control groups, instead of identifying them with nutrient based abbreviations
    5. re-write tables using complete titles and re-organise columns detailing group particulars (characteristics of respondents, experimental group, control group)

    These amendments would make the paper more reproducable and reliable.


  • 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?

    As mentioned above


  • Other Comments:

    No

     

  • Competing interests:
    Dr Jayeeta was my Student in Undergraduate Programme in Food And Nutrition.
  • 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:

    Two decades of postgraduate teaching experience in this subject area

  • How to cite:  Baroova B .Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial.[Review of the article 'Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial. ' by Mani U].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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

    The main claim was that soy can be a substate for enteral nutrition and this was showed.


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

    Yes


  • 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


  • 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?

    The authors could have exolained better.


  • 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?

    If the authors have improved the paaper showing us more results it could be more effective in impacting.


  • 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


  • Other Comments:

    No

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Beisdes being a dermatology professor I am also a nutrition doctor

  • How to cite:  Bedin V .Effect of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate of Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standar Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A Randomized, Single Blind Controlled Trial[Review of the article 'Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial. ' by Mani U].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002068
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
SIR, PLS SEND UR REVIEW. I COULD NOT READ, SOMEBODY ELSES WAS POSTED UNDER UR CATEGORY.
Responded by Dr. Jayeeta Choudhury, PhD, FICN, FACN (USA) on 13 Jul 2012 05:19:59 AM
Effect of Soy and Glutamine...
Posted by Dr. Ram B Singh on 04 Jul 2012 11:51:05 AM GMT

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

    Soy and glutamine could be protective 

    Excellent for enteral nutrition 


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

    Yes


  • 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


  • 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?

    Detailed protocol to be provided


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

    further details are required


  • 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?

    Thank you for asking me to review this article.

    Effect of soy and glutamine as substrate………

    1.This study is quite interesting but needs some modification.

    2. Use of too many abbreviation should avoided.

    3.English is very poor  which needs editing.

    4.Subjects and Methods.Please write the method of randomization, what is normal renal function-mention( Blood urea less than 40mg/dl)

    5.How many total subjects were assessed and how many excluded due to various reasons such as BUN >40mg/dl, ECH showing CAD or diabetes, or nonvolunteers.

    6.Some references from 2011 and 2012 should be given and discussed the present status on enteral nutrition.

    Table 1 should be more clear,how many groups are included.

    Table 1. Clinical data in the intervention and control groups.

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    Groups                                   Intervention group                         Control group

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Sex,male

    Mean age

    Mean body weight

    Mean BMI

    Clinical diagnosis

     

    THIS EXTRA WORK WOULD MAKE THE PAPER MORE AUTHENTIC


  • 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,very interesting


  • Other Comments:

    Given above

  • Competing interests:
    Dr Jayeeta has been my research collaborator
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:

    Singh RB, Rastogi SS, Verma R,Bolaki L, Singh R, Ghosh S. An Indian experiment with nutritional modulation in acute myocardial infarction. Am. J. Cardiol. 1992; 69 : 879-85. R.B. Singh1,*, Jayeeta Choudhury2, Fabien De Meester3 and D.W. Wilson4Development of the Mediterranean Soup for Enteral Nutrition and for Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases,TONJ,2012;5:90-98

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Singh R B.Effect of Soy and Glutamine...[Review of the article 'Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial. ' by Mani U].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002031
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
I wish to Thank You for Reviewing the article and sparing your valuable time.
Responded by Dr. Jayeeta Choudhury, PhD, FICN, FACN (USA) on 04 Jul 2012 05:03:28 PM

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

    I'm not sure i understand what is meant by "kitchen based", this should be better defined to seperate it from 

    "hospital" EN

     

    Many misplaced modifiers, and other grating sentences:

     

    for example: "Surgical stress affects whole body protein kinetics, demands increased need for optimal nutrition."

    "Surgery is a high catabolic state "

    "Post-surgical complications burden the health care extending hospital stay."

    "As nutrition support is an expensive so efforts..." 

    "Seventy-one surgical G.I patients constituted the candidates of this study with approval by ethics committee based on predetermined protocol."

     

    why capitalize "Soy" in midsentence. 


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

    It's use of the english language is novel.


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

    First couple of sentences in intro the authors did not list any references.


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

    Evidence of proper punctuation:"Further, Sm-subcategory of EnR group recorded considerably low intake of major nutrients during postoperative stage thereby resulting in lower energy as compared to their requirements whereas energy and protein intake of Sm-subcategory of EnS group was adequate {Table-3a}"


  • 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?

    Hard to read = hard to comment on


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

    Hard to read = hard to comment on


  • 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?

    Requires rewrite into proper english


  • 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?

    It is an outlier in it's use of language


  • Other Comments:

    Please rewrite

  • 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:

    Specialist in GI diseases. have worked and published in liver diseases and NAFLD

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.The lack of adherence to routine english grammer made this paper grating to read and impossible for me to comfortable understand well enough to review. [Review of the article 'Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial. ' by Mani U].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002030
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Thanks for ur valuable time.
Responded by Dr. Jayeeta Choudhury, PhD, FICN, FACN (USA) on 04 Jul 2012 05:00:48 PM

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

    Glutamine substrate-enriched EN can improve postoperative outcomes beyond standard routinely practiced Post-operative EN is an important finding that can improve outcome for patients receiving gastrointestinal surgery including length of recovery. The time and cost savings to healthcare employing this finding are very important for both patients receiving care and those responsible for giving effective care.


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

    The degree of novelty can be questioned since glutamine has long been viewed a nutrient required for optimal gastrointestinal recovery from trauma or functional disorders.


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

    The Claims are responsibly placed and supported by citations and data recorded in this study.


  • 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?

    There are no important deviations.


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

    The methodology offers details that are responsibly addressed by the author.


  • 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?

    I would like to have seen a caloric dietary analysis listing all amino acid profile for each patient. This is best represented by graphic analysis listing essential and non-essential or conditionally essential amino acids average intake per each patient group.


  • 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, this paper is outstanding offering both patients and care-givers nutritional information that may improve health outcome.


  • Other Comments:

    None, no other comments needed.

  • Competing interests:
    None.
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:

    Misner B. Is Milk Associated with Obesity? The Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. May 2010. Misner B Fifty Nutrient Associations That Influence Health State, The Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients.January 2008. Misner, B. Food alone may not provide sufficient micronutrients for preventing deficiency. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 3(1):51-55, 2006. Bagchi D, Misner B, Bagchi M, Kothari SC, Downs BW, Fafard RD, Preuss HG. Effects of orally administered undenatured type II collagen against arthritic inflammatory diseases: a mechanistic exploration. Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 2002;22(3-4):101-10.

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Misner B .Glutamine Nutrition Effects Post-Operative Recovery in Gastrointestinal Patients[Review of the article 'Effect Of Soy and Glutamine as Substrate for Enteral Nutrition Compared to Standard Hospital Regimen Among Surgical Patients - A randomized , Single Blind Controlled Trial. ' by Mani U].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002028
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
I wish to thank u for Reviewing my article.
Responded by Dr. Jayeeta Choudhury, PhD, FICN, FACN (USA) on 04 Jul 2012 04:59:33 PM