Submited on: 29 Aug 2011 02:30:27 PM GMT
Published on: 30 Aug 2011 01:52:44 PM 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? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
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? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    1. Introduction can be more structured with a brief review of already existing data on sexual dimoprhism in deciduous dentition carried out in other populations across the world.

    2. More recent references could be added.

  • Competing interests:
    nil
  • 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:

    Have read a few articles on forensic odontology.

  • How to cite:  Shrikrishna S B.Sexual dimorphism in deciduous denttion. A lilliput effect[Review of the article 'Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition: A Lilliput Effect ' by Km S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001184
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
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? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? No
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The subject studied in this article is certainly interesting and a relevant one. However the language and grammar in the manuscript needs to improve. Also the results section is poorly written & difficult to follow. Apart from these two points I would have the following recommendations to make.

    ABSTRACT

    • Objective mentioned in the abstract is not met in the study which is to measure the prevalence of sexual dimorphism in deciduous dentition.
    • Few grammatical errors

    “Teeth are an excellent..

     Cross sectional study on was conducted

     

    TITLE:

    The term “ Lilliput effect” appears only in the title and in no other section of the manuscript. It would be good if the authors could explain the relevance of this term to their study.

    INTRODUCTION:

    • The objective is mentioned as “ to investigate the prevalence of sexual dimorphism..” . However, the results and conclusion  do not give the prevalence of the condition it only states that sexual dimorphism is present.”. Thus the objectives of the study are not met.
    •  The sentence “ The dental identifications……aviation disasters.” is repeated in the introduction
    • Few grammatical errors:

    “Teeth are an excellent..

    “Many teeth survives

    • The authors mention the presence of few studies studying the presence of sexual dimorphism in deciduous teeth but none of these studies have been shown in the reference.

     

     

    Materials & Method

    • A few photographs of the method followed & materials used would help the readers better understand the procedure.
    • It is not mentioned as to whether the measurements were made intraorally or on study casts

     

    Results

    • Poorly written & difficult to follow. For eg: the first paragraph could be better written as “ The Mesio-Distal width of maxillary canine & first molar  were larger in male children as compared to female children & this difference was statistically significant.”

    Illustrations

    • Table 1,2 & 4 do not mention the units of measurement.
    • The title of tables could be simplified : for eg table 1:Mesio-Distal Dimension of maxillary teeth for male & female children. Similarly for the other tables.
    • In table 1 , * p<0.05 & * p<0.001 are not marked inside the table.

     

    Discussion

    • It would be good if the authors could give the reference for a few of the statements they have given. For eg: “Sexual dimorphism of deciduous dentition is less as compared to permanent dentition”. Similarly for the statement “ The only discriminant model based on deciduous dentition correctly sexing……. Seven teeth.”
    • The authors do not discuss their findings with respect to the findings of similar studies done by other authors.
    • The objective mentioned in the discussion is “to assess if sexual dimorphism exists..” is different from the objective mentioned in the abstract & introduction.

    References

    • Spelling errors I reference 2
    • Reference for similar studies on deciduous dentition needs to be included

     

     

  • 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:

    I am a Pediatric Dentist.

  • How to cite:  Chacko V .Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition : A Lilliput effect[Review of the article 'Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition: A Lilliput Effect ' by Km S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001183
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? Yes
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? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
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:

    This article provides an excellent example of the forensic value of the human dentition.  The article is very interesting.  It should inspire other researchers to pick up on this valuable work where these authors left off.

  • 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:

    I am interested in all areas of forensics.

  • How to cite:  Maloney W J.An Example of Teeth being a Vital Forensic Source[Review of the article 'Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition: A Lilliput Effect ' by Km S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(9):WMCRW00937
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
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? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    references are too old. author should add new and more literature.

  • 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:

    partly. l m intetesred in forensic science.

  • How to cite:  Altug H .Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition? A Lilliput Effect [Review of the article 'Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition: A Lilliput Effect ' by Km S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(9):WMCRW00935
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    It is an interesting article dealing with a rarely investigated field, The abstract does not reveals the results and the impotance of the work and there are several articles prevously published that were not included in the references section.

  • Competing interests:
    No.
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    The book is: Mej?a-Gutierrez A et al. Anatom?a Dental. Tuxtla Guti?rrez, Chis. M?xico. UNICACH. 2011. In Press.
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Me and several professors of my university we published a book on dental anatomy includding results on dental measurements of the student Mestizo population.

     

  • How to cite:  Ledesma-Montes C .Sexual Dimorphism in Decidous Dentition? A Lilliput Effect[Review of the article 'Sexual Dimorphism in Deciduous Dentition: A Lilliput Effect ' by Km S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(9):WMCRW00918
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse