-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
Other Comments:
This article confirms the findings of previous studies on this subject. The authors have explained reasins for some of their exclusion criteria but not all and it is not clear why certain exclusion criteria were chosen. It would have been more useful if authors would have included unselected patients, irrespective of their medications. In the real world, most of the people with hypertension or other cardiovascular risk factors would be taking these medications (as used in exclusion criteria by authors) and the study would have been more informative and applicable to real world clinical practice if above were inlcuded. Subgroup analysis could have been done to compare the results between different groups. However, it is a good contribution to scarce literature on Indian subjects who are resident in India.
-
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:
Diurnal variation in acute as well as chronic cardiovascular events has been well described. However, etiology and pathophysiologic considerations remain far from clear at present. An association with melatonin secretion, corticosteroids level fluctuation, sympathetic overactivity in early morning and others have been described. These may be responsible partly for the diurnal variation. However, no clear descrepancy so far have been observed in relation to correlation of ethnicity with diurnal variation of blood pressure fluctuation and cardiovascular events.
- How to cite: Singh M .Circadian variation in acute coronary syndromes in Indian population.[Review of the article 'Circadian Variation In Acute Coronary Syndromes ' by Jagannathan V].WebmedCentral 2010;1(12):WMCRW00246
The topic is exciting to. Catecholamine levels during the period assessed by the authors is essential to know it,
No. With reading it, I realize that , this clinical paper, talks about an indigenous population compared with a general population. Therefore, the title does not correspond to the content.
Dubiously
Yes, I think yes.
I can see many defects on research . The statistical description is conspicuously absent.
Not. At all.
Many!
No in this way.
Firstly I have to say I liked the title of this little essay. But with reading it, I realize that , this clinical paper, talks about an indigenous population compared with a general population. Therefore, the title does not correspond to the content. Second, there is a criterion of "exclusion" which I do not understand its why. Why chest pain was excluded? The topic is exciting to. Catecholamine levels during the period assessed by the authors is essential to know it, but I could nothing read about them in this paper. I can see many defects on research . The statistical description is conspicuously absent. However, it is my moral duty to encourage authors for review and to give more light on this fascinating subject.
None
No
No
None
I'm a Professor of Clinical & Experimental Cardiology at East Boston Hospital and its School of Medicien.