Submited on: 23 Dec 2016 11:48:00 AM GMT
Published on: 27 Dec 2016 07:48:47 AM GMT
 
Sudden unilateral hearing loss after non otologic surgery
Posted by Dr. Jagdish Chaturvedi on 24 Jan 2017 05:33:34 AM GMT Reviewed by WMC Editors

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

    Surgeries under GA can lead to SNHL. It's a rare occurance which is not going to change the way surgeries are practiced today. 


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

    It's not a novel claim. The paper itself reports a literature review of 50+ cases of similar occurance and the ENT community may already be aware of chance of SNHL after GA 


  • 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?

    More literature review is probably required to conclude what may the cause be for such SNHL 


  • 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 here 


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

    It's a case report. No methodology implied here. 


  • 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?

    A more detailed discussion performing deeper research to find out the cause of why GA causes SNHL and more concrete conclusive direction would make this paper better. 


  • 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?

    It's average. 


  • Other Comments:

    Nil 

  • Competing interests:
    .
  • 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 have been practicing ENT since 8 years now

  • How to cite:  Chaturvedi J .Sudden unilateral hearing loss after non otologic surgery [Review of the article 'Sudden Unilateral Hearing Loss After non-Otologic Surgery ' by Duarte D].WebmedCentral 2017;8(1):WMCRW003358
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Sudden Hearing loss after non otologic surgery
Posted by Dr. C S Vanaja on 24 Jan 2017 04:46:29 AM GMT Reviewed by WMC Editors

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

    It  is a case report of sudden hearing loss after a non otologic surgery. The report has good clinical implications


  • 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?

    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 as it is a single case study


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

    A detaiiled audiological evaluation should have been carried out. Only results of pure tone audiometry are reported.  To differentialy diagnose other tests such as speech audiometry, immittance evaluation, auditory brainstem responses and otoacoustic emissions should have been carried out. 


  • 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?

    A statement of purpose of the article should be included in introduction. In the discussion, the authors needds to discuss the the prognosis observed in the participant in relation to those reported in literature.


  • 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?

    It adds eviedence to literature that there can be damage to the auditory system during nonotologic surgery.


  • Other Comments:

    No

  • Competing interests:
    .
  • 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 an audiologist with 28 years of experience

  • How to cite:  Vanaja C .Sudden Hearing loss after non otologic surgery[Review of the article 'Sudden Unilateral Hearing Loss After non-Otologic Surgery ' by Duarte D].WebmedCentral 2017;8(1):WMCRW003357
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse