An Example of the Critical Review of a Paper Submitted to ...

1 53 IntroductionAs mentioned in the foreword to this edition, overthe last year, a number of poor papers have beensubmitted to the journal. Papers Submitted to thejournal are now reviewed using one of four check-lists, which are designed to evaluate papers thatreport either a research study or a Review of the lit-erature or a systematic Review or a case to authors and all four check-lists canbe downloaded from the journal s website( ). However, it has been appar-ent that a number of authors either do not read theguidelines and check-lists before submitting theirpaper or read them but forget or ignore their may help potential authors to see how acheck-list for papers reporting research studies isused by a reviewer and to read an anonymisedreview of a poor Paper .

2 It is hoped that this willhelp prevent them from making similar Paper presented below was Submitted to OralHealth and Dental Management in the Black SeaCountries (OHDMBSC) earlier this year. Althoughit is deals with an interesting and useful topic, it hada number of major faults, many of which have beenhighlighted by its reviewer. The names of theauthors have been changed, as have the details ofthe country in which the study was performed. Asfar as can be ascertained, the names and affiliationsof authors as they appear below are completely fic-titious. The reviewer used the research study different sections of the Paper are present-ed, together with the relevant sections of thereviewer s Page and Abstract as They Appearedin the PaperORAL MANIFESTATIONS OF GASTROINTESTI-NAL DISEASES.

3 AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACHJohn Browne MD, PhD1, Myron Horrowitz MD,PhD2, Barbara J Grey, MD, PhD3, CristinaIonesciu DMD, MS41 Associate Professor, Department of InternalMedicine, St Mary s Hospital, Bigtown, Uraria2 Research Assistant, Department of Oncology, StMary s Hospital, Bigtown, Uraria3 Associate Professor, Department of Histology, StMary s Hopsital, Bigtown, Uraria4 Research Assistant, Department of Biomaterialsand Biometrics, College of Dentistry, Oravia, present Paper offers a Review of the oralmanifestations of various gastrointestinal (GI) dis-eases diagnosed in patients admitted in our depart-ment. The Review includes peptic ulcer disease,chronic gastritis, gastric cancer, chronic hepaticdiseases, gallbladder and biliary diseases, andchronic and method.

4 We performed a retrospec-tive Review of medical records of 430 patients diag-nosed with GI diseases in Internal MedicineDepartment, between 2004 and 2007. Of these,182 patients ( ) also presented oral and GI diseases asso-ciated with lesions of the oral cavity were pepticulcer disease ( ), liver cirrhosis ( ),chronic viral hepatitis ( ), and chronic gastri-tis ( ) (P < ). is not uncommon for a variety ofsystemic conditions to be associated with lesions ofAn Example of the Critical Review of a Paper Submitted to OralHealth And Dental Management In The Black Sea CountriesKenneth A. , , , (Eng)., (UK)., , , Editor in Chief, OralHealth and Dental Management in the Black Sea Countries54 OHDMBSC - Vol.

5 VIII - No. 4 - December, 2009the oral cavity. This is particularly true of GI dis-eases. These oral manifestations must be properlyrecognized if the patient is to receive appropriatediagnosis and referral for treatment. As a result ofthe interdisciplinary approach, we developed a pro-tocol for check-up and follow-up of these :gastrointestinal diseases, oral s general comments on the pres-entation and abstract as recorded on thecheck-listGeneral1. Is the topic of the Paper appropriate for thejournal? Does the Paper conform to the published guide-lines for authors of the journal?No, it seemslikely that the authors did not read theGuidelines for Authors.

6 If they did, they have notfollowed them. For Example :zThe name of the corresponding author isnot given either on the front page or any-where in the abstract is not written under the sub-headings for abstracts that are listed in results and the discussion are not pre-sented in separate sections of the of the references have not been trans-lated into English and one of the referencesis guidelines also suggest that papersshould be written in the third person ( , it was observed that ) and not the first per-son ( we observed that ) and that theyshould use the past tense ( was not is )because they report events that havealready taken Is it on an important or significant topic?

7 Does the study add to the existing knowledge-base? Does the title accurately reflect the content ofthe Paper ?No, the Paper reports a retrospectivestudy of hospital patient records in a Urarianpopulation. These words do not appear in Does the Paper have a logical construction?Yes, apart from the presentation of the results anddiscussion in one section rather than in two Does the length of the Paper need adjusting (toolong or short)?It is too short. The introductionand methods sections are far too short and thereare few Is the Paper written in a clear and easily under-standable style?In general, the English in thepaper can be understood. There are a number ofterms that are not used in scientific literaturewhen it is written in English.

8 They include saburral , dental alterations, osteodental and profound periodontal disease . The editorcould revise some of these terms into generallyaccepted scientific Is the Paper free of grammatical or typograph-ical errors?There are some minor grammaticaland typographic errors, all of which could becorrected during Is there an abstract that conforms to the jour-nal s published guidelines for authors?No: asthe report of a research study, it should be writ-ten under the subheadings: Aim, Methods,Results, Conclusion. The words material and discussion should not appear in the Does the abstract present an accurate synopsisof the Paper ?No: the abstract highlights amajor error in the Paper in that it attempts tocombine two separate topics, which are areview of oral manifestations of gastrointesti-nal diseases and a retrospective study of oralmanifestations of gastrointestinal diseases in agroup of patients attending a hospital between2004 and 2007.

9 The aim described in theabstract only mentions the Review and not theretrospective Are there key words and do they seem to beappropriate?There are only two key key words retrospective study and Urarian population should be as it Appeared in the PaperMany systemic diseases have oral oral cavity might well be thought of as the win-dow to the body because oral manifestationsaccompany many systemic diseases [1]. This isparticularly true of gastrointestinal diseases. Thelesions usually correlate with active intestinal dis-ease. On occasion, however, they may presentprior to any evidence of gastrointestinal diseaseand initiate diagnosis and treatment of the underly-ing disease process [2].

10 55 OHDMBSC - Vol. VIII - No. 4 - December, 2009 The structures and lining of the oral cavity canassume importance in detecting and monitoringsystemic disease. Essentially, they act as an acce-sible mirror reflecting the health of an they show early changes brought on by analteration in the nutritional state of the may include ulceration, nodularity, atro-phy, inflammation, mobility of the teeth, easy bruis-ing, sweling, hyperesthesia, and of such changes can be most helpful inidentification of related disorders [3].The lesions of the oral mucosa, tongue, lip,osteodental structure, and salivary glands, causedby some of the GI diseases commonly diagnosed inour department are highlighted.