Submited on: 07 Sep 2010 06:30:33 AM GMT
Published on: 07 Sep 2010 03:33:49 PM GMT
Posted by Dr. Paolo Gentileschi on 13 Jan 2011 03:37:31 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? No
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:

    good paper. Nothing new but a ggod experience on the topic, well described

  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    very good

  • How to cite:  Gentileschi P .good[Review of the article 'Resolution And Improvement Of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus After Rygb ' by Kini S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(1):WMCRW00366
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse