Submited on: 10 Dec 2012 06:06:26 AM GMT
Published on: 10 Dec 2012 01:58:07 PM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper dealt with Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    It is an almost new argument.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    No


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Not applicable


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    No, it should be more linked to review article guidelines writing


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Yes, a major adherence to review's guidelines will improve the paper


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes because of greater development of DM2 and the effects of Hypomagnesemia on body function.


  • Other Comments:

    Bari, February, 05th, 2013

    Title: “Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article”.

    Dear Editor,

    We have read through the manuscript and we think that the manuscript seems to show important and major lacking news:

    1. English should be revised in order to correct flaws.
    2. No review aims had been outlined at the end of introduction section.
    3. Although it is a review article, it lacks some characteristics of this kind of scientific work:

    a) No inclusion/exclusion criteria had been included. Please provide.
    b) No articles number had been provided, nor the number of excluded article.
    c) No flow-chart of the study research had been provided.
    d) No tables resembling data, main outcomes, results, etc of the theme treated had been provided

    The authors’ worte: “Other potential causes of lower serum magnesium in obese type 2 diabetic patients include reduced intestinal magnesium absorption secondary to higher fat intake and lower fiber intake(27), and diabetic autonomic neuropathy that may reduce oral intake and gastrointestinal absorption”. It would be more creditworthy to better describe the possible mechanism underlining the previous sentences. Please provide.

    The authors’ wrote: “Insulin may induce a shift of magnesium from the plasma to the erythrocytes and smooth muscle cells, both in vivo and in vitro, helping to explain the abnormalities in magnesium circulating levels frequently reported in diabetic patients”. It would be more clear of the authors try to better explain this mechanism in agreement with literature data.

    The authors should better describe the studies considered in order to manage their scientific aims. They should better evaluate the characteristics of the studies considered and, above all, the limitations of these researches. Please provide.

    Yours sincerely,
    Dr. Pietro Scicchitano

    Address:
    Piazza G. Cesare 11 - 70124 Bari Italy
    Tel +39-3339801846
    e-mail: piero.sc@hotmail.it

  • 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 work in intensive care unit of Cardiology Department

  • How to cite:  Scicchitano P .Review of Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article[Review of the article 'Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article ' by Chhabra N].WebmedCentral 2013;4(2):WMCRW002488
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Hypomagnesemia is both a cause and as well a consequence of diabetes mellitus. Early intervention by correcting the magnesium levels can improve the glycemic stataus and improve the qualty of life of the affected diabetic.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes, these claims are novel. Magnesium is a forgotten cation despite the fact that it has an important role in many physiological and biochemical processes vital to life. Magnesium has significant role in the release of insulin and utilization of glucose, deficiency of magnesium worsens glycemic status , but timely interventions and that too in highly economical ways can check the progresion of the disease and delay the onset of diabetes related complications.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes there is a proper flow of information. The details are relevant and appropriately placed


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes, the results are as per the presumptions.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    No such deviations


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes the methodology is valid and advanced.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Since the topic is vast in itself, there is still a potential to explore more about the role of magnesium in Diabetes and associted complications but sufficiant details have been provided in the article.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes, the article is well written and outstanding indeed, ofcourse can be presented any where .


  • Other Comments:

    A close attention is required to be paid to magnesium levels in patients suffering from diabetes mellitus as well in those having the family history of diabetes mellitus considering its significant  role in metabolic reactions.

  • 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:

    27 years

  • How to cite:  Chhabra N .Hypomagnesemia and its Implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article [Review of the article 'Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article ' by Chhabra N].WebmedCentral 2013;4(1):WMCRW002456
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Hypermagnesemia and its Implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Posted by Anonymous Reviewer on 12 Dec 2012 07:19:58 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The main claims are that Hypermagnesemia can affect both Insulin secretion and Insulin action. In addition hyperglycemia reduces tubular reabsorbtion of Mg ion.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    It is a review article, so yes.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    NA


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    NA


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Estimation of hs-CRP can be included to prove inflamatory response


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes, because there are other studies which suggest that severe hypomagnesemia was strongly associated with elevated hs-CRP and hs-CRP decreases with mg supplimentation in diabetic patients, also low mg levels lead to the induction of proinflamatory response, so low mg levels can be a reason for diabetic complications.


  • Other Comments:

    Which estimation out of the total serum mg ion levels or intracellular mg estimation is better indicator of hypomagnesemia, is not well documented.

  • 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:

    Have guided a thesis on a similar topic

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.Hypermagnesemia and its Implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus[Review of the article 'Hypomagnesemia and its implications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus- A Review Article ' by Chhabra N].WebmedCentral 2013;3(12):WMCRW002391
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse