WebmedCentral Editor
View all WebmedCentral Editors
No Image

Dr. Prashanth GP

Assistant Professor
KLE University's Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College
Belgaum. Karnataka

Brief Biography:

Dr. Gowda Parameshwar Prashanth MBBS, MD. specializes in the care of normal and sick newborns and children.

Graduation in Medicine: MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery) in 2005 at Vijayanagara Institute of Medical Sciences (VIMS), Bellary, Karnataka, India.

Post graduation: Master’s Degree in Pediatrics at King George Medical College, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Awarded gold medal at the completion of  graduation in Medicine by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS), Bangalore in the year 2005.

Awarded the Academic gold medal in the Doctoral program at KGMC, Lucknow, in the year 2009. 

Publications: More than a dozen publications in peer-reviewed (pubmed-indexed) national and international journals in the fields of pediatrics, perinatology and pediatric critical care medicine.


Academic positions:

Senior Resident, Neonatal Unit, Department of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh (India) and Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College of Medical Sciences and Hospital (SDMCMS), Dharwad Karnataka; Assistant Professor, KLE University’s Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belgaum, Karnataka


Research interests:

Critical care medicine; Pediatric infectious diseases


What I think of the idea behind WebmedCentral:

The concept of post-publication peer review looks fresh and interesting; it surely needs experimentation. However, in my opinion, the faculty members and the advisory board have an important role to play in maintaining a uniform quality of the publications. We also need to understand that collaborative efforts and lots of hard work are warranted to sustain the enthusiasm. However, the initiative must come from those who strongly believe in this form of peer review. Rigorous measures are needed to maintain a uniform quality of the reviews, including segregation of the ‘publication- standard’ work on the site. The bottom line is that fabricated science, biased opinions, and substandard writings being presented as part of the scientific literature cannot be accepted in either forms of peer review.