-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
There are no claims. The author wroe on to start a new search facility.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
There are no claims.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
NA
-
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?
NA
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
NA
-
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 manuscript is too general. Iconsider that an article on a more specific subject will be prefered.
-
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 a good paper.
-
Other Comments:
None.
-
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 make research in Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology
- How to cite: Ledesma-Montes C .Building & Marketing Clinical Research Site[Review of the article 'Building & Marketing Clinical Research Site ' by Tirunagari S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002586
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
No claims, the plan of the article is extremly helpfull to start a new search facility. May need improvement but still an excellent effort with clear broad lines.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No claims but good plans and organised method of thinking. May need some improvement from site to site and country to country but still good effort.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
NA
-
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?
NA
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
NA
-
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?
As a reader I would benifit from having a concentrated article on one of the subjects but not both building the site or marketing the site.
-
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 excellent but would benfit from being concentrated in one subject. I would say perfect building article but needs improvement marketing article.
-
Other Comments:
Love to have the same article improved for different situations and environment for building a research site with some oppertunity of reader to add his plans for the site.
-
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:
Researcher
- How to cite: Othman M .Helpfull opinion[Review of the article 'Building & Marketing Clinical Research Site ' by Tirunagari S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002576
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
The author's aim is to discuss the many aspects of building and marketing a clinical research site.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes- It would be a great lecture for anyone involved in clinical research.
The author presents an opinion-based article. The author discusses the proper requirements which have to be met for conducting clinical trials. The author cautions that the area where the investigative product is stored should be secure and only authorized individuals should have access. Other aspects of the site are discussed. These include the exam room, laboratory, computer area and work space for the study coordinator.
None
No
No
None
Clinical associate professor