Submited on: 24 May 2011 09:35:47 AM GMT
Published on: 25 May 2011 04:56:14 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? 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? 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? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? No
  • Other Comments:

    There is no key words. result parts of abstract need to make minar correction. Standard deviation is given not in text . It should be like Sd =1.23

  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Public Health

  • How to cite:  Aryal U .Lung Function Among Improved and Traditional Cooking Stove Users [Review of the article 'Lung Function Among Improved and Traditional Cooking Stove Users ' by Tuladhar B].WebmedCentral 2011;2(6):WMCRW00817
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse