Submited on: 10 Mar 2011 03:46:51 AM GMT
Published on: 10 Mar 2011 09:59:47 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? Partly
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? 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? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    1. No pictures / illustrations provided

    2. Author's experience on the subject - not substantiated by clinical data 

     

     

  • Competing interests:
    Nil
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    1. http://entscholar.wordpress.com/article/malignant-otitis-externa-a-review-of-current-literature/ 2. http://www.drtbalu.co.in/malig_otitis.html
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have actively and successfully managed lots of cases of malignant otitis externa.  I am a Professor of otolaryngology.

  • How to cite:  Thiagarajan B .Malignant Otitis externa: A review of aetiology, presentation, investigations and current management stratergies[Review of the article 'Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies ' by Olaleye O].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001722
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? 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? No
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This is a reasonable review of the topic but there are a few minor problems that need to be addressed.

     

    Background: the introductory background paragraph needs to be referenced appropriately.

     

    Aetiology: The commonest organism is pseudomonas aeruginosa. A more in depth review of developing antibiotic resistance would be more helpful than the mention of the odd exotic organism described in a case report.

     

    Presentation: This section could be structured better. The "at risk" patients would fit better in the aeitology section. There should be a seperate section on Classification and Complications.

     

    Investigations: Some of the startements made need to be appropriately refrenced.

     

    Treatment: This section also needs to be more structured and repetition avoided.

     

    Conclusions: The references can be removed.

     

     

     

     

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • 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 consultant in otolaryngology-head & neck surgery and have managed a number of patients with this condition during my training.

  • How to cite:  Moorthy R .Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies [Review of the article 'Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies ' by Olaleye O].WebmedCentral 2012;2(5):WMCRW00771
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
A very good review
Posted by Mr. Bertram Fu on 10 Apr 2011 11:15:25 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:

    This is a comprehensive but concise review of the current evidence available on the subject. 

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • 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 trainee in Otorhinolaryngology and have regular exposure to and experience in management of patients with MOE.

  • How to cite:  Fu B .A very good review[Review of the article 'Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies ' by Olaleye O].WebmedCentral 2012;2(4):WMCRW00655
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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Keep up the good work.

  • 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 have had the privilege of managing a substantial number of patients with necrotising otitis externa and the challenges of management are as exemplified in this work. Early diagnosis and aggressive treatment does give a good outcome.

    The current management strategies are quite interesting however.

    Thank you for bringing these issues to the fore.

     

  • How to cite:  Adoga A A.Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies[Review of the article 'Malignant Otitis Externa: A Review of Aetiology, Presentation, Investigations and Current Management Strategies ' by Olaleye O].WebmedCentral 2012;2(3):WMCRW00617
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse