S.N

Title of Article

Author

Reviewer

Comments

1

Editorial: Perioperative Safety in the Era of Technological Acceleration

Rashid MH, Muhib MM

Doi: https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.90083

Dr. Md. Humayun Rashid

Dr. Tarana Tabasshum

Dr. Nasima Akter

Editorial Board Accepted The Manuscript As It Is.

2

Health Related  Quality of Life Among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease at a Tertiary Hospital in Bangladesh

Kohinur, Karim F, Chowdhury MZU, Ahmed M, Sharif H

Doi: https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.85762

Prof. Dr. Fayeza Karim

Dr. Md. Mobarok Hossain

Prof. S.M.Noman Khaled Chowdhury

Summarization: This manuscript requires substantial clarification. There is no clear stated objective in introduction or abstract. Major methodological gaps (E.G: No sampling method, inclusion / exclusion criteria, ethical approval, detailed statistical analysis or questionnaire attached); Poor quality tables, figures need redesigning, Discussion lack focus or current study and there is no mention of limitations; Reference are not updated and did not followed Vancouver citation methods.

1. Title: Title is understandable but needs correction for grammar and capitalization; Should be concise, specific, and academically formatted.

Recommended Title:
Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease at a Tertiary Hospital in Bangladesh

2. Abstract

Issues Identified:

• Grammar errors.
• Methods unclear and overly detailed.
• Results need clearer data reporting.
• Conclusion short and not aligned with findings.
• Keywords acceptable but spacing and order inconsistent.

3. Introduction

Problems:

• Repetition of concepts.
• Multiple long paragraphs without structure.
• References inconsistent and not formatted.

Recommendations:

• Clearly define COPD.
• Present global and Bangladesh burden with citations.
• End introduction with a clear objective statement.

4. Methods

Issues:

• Needs clarity on:
  • Study design.
  • Setting.
  • Inclusion/exclusion criteria.
  • Sampling.
  • Questionnaire description.
  • Ethical considerations.

Recommendations:

• Present in subheadings: Study Design, Study Population, Sampling, Tools, Data Collection, Data Analysis, Ethics.

5. Results

Issues:

• Tables and figures described without actual figures.
• Redundant explanations.
• Statistical reporting inconsistent.

Recommendations:

• Summarize key results without unnecessary repetition.
• Ensure table captions follow journal style.
• Avoid interpretations in results section.

6. Discussion

Issues:

• Unstructured.
• Repetition of results.
• Weak comparison with literature.
• No strengths/limitations.

7. Conclusion

Adequate but requires refinement.

8. References

• Not formatted to Vancouver style.
• Incomplete and inconsistently numbered.

Some repeated or unclear citations.

3

Factors Influencing Neurological Outcome Of Surgically Managed Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury

Ohi SM, Rashid MH,  Ahmed AU, Hossain K,  Sarker T, Newaz MS, Reza AHMT, Ilius MM

Doi: https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.88126

Dr. Sirajul Monir Ohi

Dr. Sariful Hasan

Prof. Nasima Akhter

Recommendation: MAJOR REVISION REQUIRED

1. Overall Assessment:

The manuscript addresses an important neurosurgical topic with clinical relevance, particularly in resource-limited settings. However, significant methodological, statistical, and reporting issues limit its suitability for publication in its current form. The manuscript requires major revision according to international guidelines such as STROBE.

2. Title:

– Appropriate and informative.

– Minor grammatical refinement suggested.

3. Abstract:

– Should be structured (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusion).

– Sample size and study design should be clearly stated.

– Some grammatical errors need correction.

4. Introduction:

– Adequate background provided but overly lengthy.

– Research gap should be clearer.

5. Materials and Methods:

Major concerns:

– Study design unclear.

– Very small sample size (n=27); no calculation provided.

– Ethical approval number missing.

– Surgical protocol not standardized.

– Timing definition not aligned with international standards.

6. Statistical Analysis:

– Tests mentioned but limited validity due to small sample.

– No multivariate analysis.

– Confidence intervals inconsistently reported.

7. Results:

– Data extensive but poorly structured.

– Tables and figures need standard formatting.

– Outcome classification questionable.

8. Discussion:

– Overly verbose and partly repetitive.

– Needs stronger critical analysis.

– Limitations not adequately discussed.

9. Conclusion:

– Acceptable but should be concise.

10. Limitations:

– Should include small sample size, single-center bias, lack of multivariate analysis, short follow-up.

11. References:

– Formatting inconsistent (not Vancouver style).

– Some outdated citations.

12. Language:

– Requires major grammatical revision.

13. Ethics:

– Approval number required.

14. Strengths:

– Prospective design

– Use of ASIA and FIM scores

15. Weaknesses:

– Small sample size

– Methodological limitations

– Statistical limitations

Final Decision:

Major revision required before reconsideration.

4

Evaluation Of Factors Affecting Intraoperative And Postoperative Hemorrhage In Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Munir S, Alam SM, Rajib AM, Islam SM, Islam M

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86257

Dr. Serajum Munir

Dr. Saad Mohammad

Dr. Jahidul Islam

Manuscript Title: Evaluation of factors affecting intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage in percutaneous nephrolithotomy

General Comments

This manuscript addresses an important and clinically relevant issue in urology, namely hemorrhagic complications associated with PCNL. The topic is appropriate for the readership of East West Medical College Journal and the study provides local data from Bangladesh, which adds value. The manuscript is generally well structured and comprehensive. However, several issues related to methodology, statistical clarity, language, and formatting need to be addressed before the article can be considered for publication.

Strengths

1. Relevant clinical topic: Hemorrhage in PCNL is a significant complication with practical implications.
2. Prospective observational design: Strengthens the reliability of data compared to retrospective studies.
3. Comprehensive factor analysis: Inclusion of both patient-related and procedure-related variables is commendable.
4. Clear outcome measures: Use of hemoglobin drop, hematocrit drop, and transfusion requirement is appropriate.
5. Contextual discussion: Findings are well compared with existing international literature.

Major Concerns

1. Study Design and Sampling

• The use of purposive sampling introduces selection bias. This limitation should be emphasized more clearly in both the Methodology and Limitations sections.
• The sample size calculation is insufficiently justified. The authors mention an initial proposed sample size of 65 but do not explain how it was calculated (power, effect size, confidence level).

Recommendation:
Provide a clear explanation of sample size estimation or justify why formal calculation was not feasible.

2. Statistical Analysis

• Multiple linear regression is used, but regression coefficients (β), confidence intervals, and model fitness (R²) are not reported.
• It is unclear whether assumptions of linear regression (normality, multicollinearity, homoscedasticity) were tested.
• Blood transfusion requirement is a binary outcome, yet linear regression appears to be used instead of logistic regression.

Recommendation:

• Include β coefficients, 95% confidence intervals, and R² values.
• Clarify assumption testing.
• Consider reanalyzing transfusion requirement using binary logistic regression, or justify the current approach.

3. Measurement of Blood Loss

• The formula for calculating total hemorrhage is unclear and incorrectly formatted in the manuscript.
• The method of adjusting hemoglobin drop for transfused blood units should be described more clearly and consistently.

Recommendation:
Rewrite the formula clearly using standard mathematical notation and explain it step by step.

4. Ethical Considerations

• There is no mention of ethical approval or informed consent.

Recommendation:
Add a statement confirming approval from an Institutional Review Board / Ethics Committee and informed consent from participants.

Minor Concerns

Language and Grammar

• There are numerous grammatical errors, spacing issues, and typographical inconsistencies (e.g., “factoron”, “gm/dl”, spacing around symbols).
• Some sentences are overly long and repetitive, particularly in the Discussion.

Recommendation:
The manuscript requires thorough English language editing.

Tables and Formatting

• Tables are overcrowded and not consistently labeled.
• Table titles should be clearer and self-explanatory.
• Units (e.g., mm², Fr, gm/dl) should be standardized throughout.

Recommendation:
Revise tables according to journal formatting guidelines and simplify where possible.

References

• Most references are relevant and up to date, but formatting is inconsistent.
• Journal names should follow a single referencing style.

Recommendation:
Revise references according to the journal’s Vancouver-style guidelines.

Discussion and Interpretation

• The discussion is detailed but could be more concise.
• Some interpretations imply causation rather than association, which is not justified by an observational study.

Recommendation:
Use cautious language (e.g., “associated with” rather than “causes”) and reduce repetition.

Conclusion

The conclusions are generally supported by the data but should better reflect the study’s limitations and observational nature.

Final Recommendation

Major Revision Required

The manuscript has scientific merit and potential for publication, but substantial revisions are required, particularly in:

• Statistical analysis and reporting
• Ethical documentation
• Language and formatting clarity

5

Prevalence And Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern Of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Isolated From Clinical Samples At A Tertiary Care Hospital In Bangladesh

Johora FT, Khatun S, Munny NN, Chowdhury MZU, Rizvi SMS

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.83547

Fatima Tuj Johora

Prof. Ahsanul Haque

Dr. Saad Mohammad

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Recommended Correction:

In Methods and Materials: Please include the total number of samples

Results: Correction needed in Table I; the Percentage is missing. 

Correction needed in Table III: Does not match the number of N and percentage. 

After checking and correcting the results, please correct the discussion portion accordingly.

Decision: Accept with minor correction

* 

6

Biochemical Markers Of Mitochondrial Dysfunction In Bangladeshi Autistic Children

Karim M, Shahazadi S, Awaul MR

Doi:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.85923

Dr. Mahmuda Karim

Dr. Nur Nahar Ayrin

Dr. A.D.M.Rifat Chowdhury

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted

7

Diagnostic Efficacy of CT Scan and Ultrasonography in Identifying Hepatic Metastases from GI Cancers: A Histopathological Perspective

Afrin O, Alam S, Raut A, Jhahan H, Jahan T

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.85936

Dr. Orin Afrin

Dr. Sanowar Rahman

Dr. Galib Md Shawon

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted

8

Perception of Adolescent Girls Regarding Communication on Sexual & Reproductive Health with Mothers

Jannat T, Ashikuzzaman M, Kabir H, Podder Irani SP, Islam S, Rahman MA, Akram A

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86075

Dr. Tasnim Jannat

Arifa Akram

Dr. Mukit Ahmed

Dr. Marufur Rahman

Editorial Review Report

Manuscript Title: Perception of Adolescent Girls Regarding Communication on Sexual & Reproductive Health with Mothers
Journal: East West Medical College Journal
Manuscript Type: Original Article
Decision: Major Revision Required

General Comments

The manuscript addresses an important and contextually relevant public health issue—mother–daughter communication on sexual and reproductive health (SRH) among adolescent girls in Bangladesh. The topic is timely, culturally significant, and aligned with the journal’s scope. The study includes a reasonable sample size, clear objectives, and extensive descriptive data.

However, the manuscript requires substantial revision before it can be considered for publication. Several methodological, analytical, presentation, and language-related issues need to be addressed to improve scientific rigor, clarity, and consistency.

Major Comments

1. Study Design and Sampling

• The sample size was calculated as 355, but only 291 respondents were included. This discrepancy should be clearly explained in the Methods section, including its impact on study power.
• The use of purposive sampling limits generalizability. While acknowledged in the limitations, this issue should also be justified in the Methods section with appropriate rationale.
• Inclusion of only urban government girls’ schools in Dhaka restricts external validity. This should be emphasized more clearly in both the Discussion and Conclusion.

2. Ethical Considerations

• The manuscript states that written assent was obtained from adolescents; however, it is unclear whether parental/guardian consent was obtained, which is typically required for minors. Please clarify.
• There is redundancy regarding consent (written assent, verbal consent). Please streamline and clarify the consent procedure.

3. Statistical Analysis and Interpretation

• Inferential analyses are limited. While chi-square tests are reported, the manuscript lacks:
  • Clear operational definitions of “communication barrier” and related composite variables.
  • Adjustment for potential confounders (e.g., maternal education, family type).
• Some p-values are reported inconsistently (e.g., χ² and p-values repeated or mismatched in Table 6). These should be rechecked carefully.
• The association results related to religion should be interpreted cautiously to avoid overgeneralization and potential misrepresentation.

4. Results Presentation

• Tables are overly long and contain repetitive “Yes/No” categories, making them difficult to read.
  • Consider summarizing key findings and moving detailed items to supplementary material.
• Figures (Figure 1 and Figure 2) are mentioned but not adequately described. Ensure figures are:
  • Clearly labeled
  • Referenced properly in the text
  • Of publishable resolution and format
• In Table 3, some entries appear misaligned or duplicated (e.g., syphilis data). Please review carefully for accuracy.

5. Discussion Section

• The Discussion largely reiterates results without sufficient critical analysis.
• Comparisons with Bangladeshi studies should be expanded, and international comparisons should be contextualized.
• Potential policy and programmatic implications (e.g., school-based or maternal education interventions) should be elaborated.
• The discussion on religion should be handled with greater academic sensitivity and supported by stronger evidence.

6. Language and Style

• The manuscript requires substantial English language editing.
  • Frequent grammatical errors, awkward phrasing, and inconsistent tense usage are present.
  • Examples include: “Not wailing to answer the question,” “menstrustion,” “beautify and attractive,” etc.
• Abbreviations such as SRH, STI, HRSB, and SH should be defined clearly at first use and used consistently.
• Formatting inconsistencies are present across headings, tables, and references.

7. References

• Some references are outdated and rely heavily on studies from Ethiopia rather than Bangladesh.
• Ensure all references are:
  • Cited sequentially in the text
  • Formatted according to the journal’s reference style
• Verify accuracy of all citations and remove redundancy.

Minor Comments

• Keywords: “Adolescent SHR” should be corrected to “Adolescent SRH.”
• Abstract: The Methods section should mention sampling technique and study period more clearly.
• Conclusion: Avoid introducing new associations not fully discussed in the Results.

Recommendation

The manuscript has potential merit, but due to the issues outlined above, it cannot be accepted in its current form. The authors are encouraged to undertake a major revision, addressing methodological clarity, statistical rigor, presentation quality, and language accuracy.

A revised manuscript should be resubmitted along with:

1. A point-by-point response to each comment.
2. A tracked-changes version of the manuscript.

The revised submission will be reconsidered for publication following re-evaluation.

Editor
East West Medical College Journal

9

Distribution of ABO and Rh Blood Group Systems in the General Population of Dhaka, Bangladesh: Insight from a Single-Centre Analysis

Mazumder P, Akram A, Khatun K

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86076

Priyanka Mazumder

Dr. Maruf Bin Habib

Dr. Md. Ibraheem

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted

10

Presence of Accessory Foramen: Caroticoclinoid Foramen & Foramen Vesalius in Dry Ossified Human Middle Cranial Fossa

Ferdous Z , Ara S, Rahman AMQ, Rashid MH, Sayeed S, Rahman S, Sharna T

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86106

Dr. Zannatul Ferdous

Dr. Nazmin Ahmed

Dr. Jahidul Islam

General Comments

This manuscript presents an anatomical study on the presence of the caroticoclinoid foramen (CCF) and foramen Vesalius (FV) in dry human skulls. The topic is relevant to anatomy, neurosurgery, radiology, and ophthalmology, particularly for procedures involving the middle cranial fossa and cavernous sinus. The study contributes valuable regional anatomical data from Bangladesh, where such studies are scarce. Overall, the manuscript is informative and clinically relevant, but it requires revisions in structure, clarity, statistical presentation, and referencing before it can be considered for publication in the East West Medical College Journal.

Strengths

1. Clinically relevant anatomical topic with clear neurosurgical and radiological implications.
2. Reasonable sample size (117 skulls) for an osteological study.
3. Clear objectives focusing on two important accessory foramina.
4. Ethical clearance obtained, which strengthens the study’s credibility.
5. Extensive literature comparison across different populations.

Major Comments

1. Abstract Structure and Clarity

• The abstract is overly long and repetitive, especially in the Background section.
• The objectives are mixed with background information.
• Results lack absolute numbers alongside percentages.

Recommendation:
Restructure the abstract into standard subheadings (Background, Objective, Materials & Methods, Results, Conclusion) with concise, focused content.

2. Methodology and Study Design

• The study is described as “cross-sectional, analytical,” but no analytical or statistical tests are actually reported.
• Sex, age, and laterality distribution (bilateral vs unilateral presence) are not adequately detailed.
• Criteria for identifying foramina rely solely on visual inspection without inter-observer validation.

Recommendation:

• Clarify whether the study is purely descriptive or analytical.
• Explicitly state that only descriptive statistics were used, or include appropriate statistical analysis.
• Mention whether observations were made by more than one examiner and how disagreements were resolved.

3. Results Presentation

• Results are very brief and lack depth.
• Percentages are reported without confidence intervals.
• Bilateral versus unilateral presence of CCF and FV is not clearly tabulated.

Recommendation:

• Expand the Results section with:
  • Clear differentiation between unilateral and bilateral occurrences
  • Proper tabulation with totals and percentages
• Ensure figures and tables are clearly labeled and referenced in the text.

4. Figures and Tables

• Figures are referenced but not adequately described in the manuscript.
• Table formatting is inconsistent and does not follow journal standards.

Recommendation:

• Ensure all figures are of high resolution and properly captioned.
• Reformat tables to align with East West Medical College Journal guidelines.

Minor Comments

Language and Grammar

• There are frequent grammatical errors, long sentences, and repetition.
• Some phrases are awkward or unclear (e.g., “irrigates the major part of the cerebrum”).

Recommendation:
A thorough English language and technical editing is required.

Introduction

• The introduction is overly long and contains repeated clinical explanations.
• Some anatomical descriptions could be condensed.

Recommendation:
Shorten and focus the introduction on rationale, relevance, and study objectives.

Discussion

• The discussion includes excessive ethnographic descriptions (race and population data) that are not directly relevant to the anatomical findings.
• Comparison with previous studies is good but could be more concise.

Recommendation:

• Reduce nonessential demographic commentary.
• Focus discussion on anatomical variation, clinical relevance, and comparison with key studies.

References

• Reference formatting is inconsistent.
• Wikipedia is used as a reference for demographic information, which is not appropriate for a scientific journal.
• URLs are inconsistently presented.

Recommendation:

• Remove or replace Wikipedia references with peer-reviewed sources.
• Format references strictly according to Vancouver style as per journal policy.

Limitations

The limitations are mentioned but could be strengthened by explicitly stating:

• Lack of radiological correlation
• Absence of morphometric measurements
• Unknown age and sex of skulls

Conclusion

The conclusion is relevant and clinically meaningful but somewhat repetitive. It accurately reflects the findings and emphasizes clinical importance.

Final Recommendation

Major Revision Required

The manuscript has scientific merit and clinical relevance, but substantial revisions are required before acceptance, particularly in:

• Abstract conciseness
• Methodological clarity
• Results expansion and table presentation
• Language and reference quality

11

Alterations in Serum Calcium, Magnesium, and Zinc Levels in Preeclampsia: A Comparative Study with Normotensive Pregnant Women

Borhan KB, Rahaman FF, Priyanka KT, Haque NE, Farah A, Nowshin N, Shreya PD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86107

Dr Kawsar Binte Borhan

Prof. Fayeza Karim

Dr. Sharmina Yeasmin

Overall Editorial Decision:

Minor to Moderate Revision Required

General Editorial Comments

This manuscript presents a well-structured, clinically relevant, and timely investigation into the association between serum micronutrient levels and preeclampsia. The topic is of high clinical importance, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where nutritional deficiencies are prevalent and preeclampsia remains a major cause of maternal morbidity and mortality.

The study design is appropriate, sample size is adequate, methodology is clearly described, and statistical analysis is properly conducted. The discussion is comprehensive, evidence-based, and well-integrated with recent international literature.

However, several editorial, methodological clarity, formatting, and minor scientific issues need correction before the manuscript can be accepted for publication.

Major Comments

1. Ethical Approval – Acceptable but Needs Formatting

• Ethical approval has been mentioned appropriately.
• Please include:
  • Ethical approval reference number
  • Date of approval

2. Sampling Method & Bias Clarification

• Purposive sampling was used. Please briefly:
  • Justify the use of purposive sampling
  • Mention possible selection bias as a limitation

3. Laboratory Methods – Minor Clarification Needed

• Specify:
  • Brand and model of automated biochemical analyzer
  • Internal quality control measures

4. Zinc Measurement Extremely High in Controls

• Mean serum zinc: 92.82 ± 21.55 µg/dL
• Please:
  • Confirm reference ranges used
  • Mention calibration and external quality assurance
  • Clarify unusually large SD

5. Statistical Analysis Enhancement

• Add:
  • 95% Confidence Intervals
  • Effect size (Cohen’s d) if possible

Minor Comments

1. Title Optimization

Suggested slight modification:

Alterations in Serum Calcium, Magnesium, and Zinc Levels in Preeclampsia: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study

2. Abstract Refinement

• Good structure, but:
  • Make conclusion more concise
  • Avoid repetition of background information

3. Tables & Figures Formatting

• Improve:
  • Table headings
  • Uniform unit formatting
  • Figure legends clarity

4. Language & Grammar

• Overall good English.
• Minor corrections required:
  • Remove redundancy
  • Improve sentence flow

5. Author Information Formatting

• Follow journal standard:
  • Institutional affiliation order
  • Corresponding author designation

Scientific Strengths

• Relevant and important research question
• Good sample size
• Clear methodology
• Strong statistical significance
• Updated and high-quality references
• Practical clinical implications

Limitations to Mention Explicitly

Please include a separate “Limitations” subsection:

• Single-center study
• Purposive sampling
• Cross-sectional design (cannot infer causality)
• Dietary intake not quantitatively measured

Final Recommendation

 Minor to Moderate Revision Required

This manuscript is scientifically sound and clinically valuable. After addressing the above comments, it is highly suitable for publication in East West Medical College Journal.

12

Prevalence and antibiotic resistance pattern of extended spectrum beta lactamase  producing Escherichia coli isolated from urinary tract infection in a tertiary care hospital.

Munny NN, Chowdhury MZU, Johora FT, Khatun S

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86253

Dr. Nazmun Nahar Munni

Dr. Tarana Tabassum

Dr. Latiful Bari

1. Overall Editorial Assessment

·         The manuscript addresses an important and clinically relevant topic, particularly in the context of antimicrobial resistance in Bangladesh.

·         The study has local epidemiological significance and potential utility in guiding empirical antibiotic therapy.

·         However, the manuscript requires substantial revision in terms of scientific clarity, methodological detail, statistical analysis, language quality, and formatting before it can be considered for publication.

2. Title

·         The title is appropriate but can be improved for clarity.

·         Suggested revision: ‘Prevalence and Antibiotic Resistance Pattern of ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli among Urinary Tract Infection Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Dhaka.’

3. Abstract

·         The abstract generally reflects the study but requires grammatical correction.

·         Methods should clearly mention study design, ESBL detection method, and statistical analysis.

·         Results should include key statistical values and clearer structure.

·         Conclusion should avoid therapeutic recommendations beyond study scope.

4. Introduction

·         Introduction provides relevant background but contains grammatical errors and redundancy.

·         The research gap and justification should be more explicitly stated.

·         Recent regional and Bangladesh-specific data should be incorporated.

5. Materials and Methods

·         Study design is appropriate but requires clarification whether consecutive or convenience sampling was used.

·         Ethical approval statement is missing and must be included.

·         Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly stated.

·         ESBL detection methodology should strictly follow CLSI latest guidelines and be clearly described.

·         Statistical analysis is insufficient; no inferential statistics reported.

6. Results

·         Results are relevant but presentation is inconsistent.

·         Tables and figures must be clearly labeled and properly formatted.

·         Statistical significance testing is absent.

·         Avoid repetition between text and tables.

7. Discussion

·         Discussion compares findings with international studies but lacks deeper interpretation.

·         Local clinical implications should be emphasized.

·         Limitations of retrospective single-center design must be clearly stated.

·         Avoid overgeneralization of findings.

8. Conclusion

·         Conclusion is generally supported but contains therapeutic recommendations beyond observational study scope.

·         Recommendation of carbapenem as first-line therapy should be revised cautiously.

9. Ethical Considerations

·         Ethical approval from Institutional Review Board must be clearly mentioned with approval number.

·         Patient confidentiality measures should be described.

10. Language and Grammar

·         Manuscript contains numerous grammatical, spelling, and formatting errors.

·         Professional English language editing is strongly recommended.

11. References

·         References are generally appropriate but formatting is inconsistent.

·         Journal reference style must follow East West Medical College Journal guidelines.

·         Ensure uniform citation format.

12. Final Recommendation

·         Decision: Revision Required.

·         The manuscript has scientific merit but requires revision before reconsideration for publication.

13

Arsenic-induced keratosis

Sharmin H , Joynal BJ, Islam Sumaiya, Fatema N, Sultana M, Chowdhury A, Saha KC

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.x86249

Dr. Hazera Sharmin

Dr. Hasan Sharif

Dr. Maruf Bin Habib

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted

14

Fetal And Maternal Outcomes In Pregnant Women With Hypothyroidism: An Observational Study In A Tertiary Care Hospital

Salam S, Naz M , Akhter S , Khatun R

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86256

Dr. Soheli Salam

Prof.  Sharmin Yeasmin

Prof. Ratu Rumana Binte Rahman

The title has conceptual and methodological problems, mainly related to case control study design.

Case control studies start with an outcome. This title starts with hypothyroidism, which is an exposure, not an outcome.

Hypothyroidism -> Exposure

Fetal & Maternal Outcome -> Otcomes

Case control studies usually focus on one primary outcome. “Fetal and Maternal outcome” is broad and vague..

Hence The title could be:

(If the fetal outcome is primary) 

Adverse Fetal Outcomes in Pregnancy and Maternal Hypothyroidism: a case- control study in a tertiary care hospital.

(If the maternal outcome is primary)

Adverse maternal outcomes in pregnancy associated with hypothyroidism: an observational study in a tertiary care hospital.

Preferred & methodologically sound title of this study can be: Fetal and Maternal Outcomes in Pregnant Women With Hypothyroidism: An Observational Study in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Odds Ratio (OR) was not calculated in this study. It is a must for a case-control study. 

In this study, participants are selected based on the exposure. But in a case-control study, participants are selected b ased on outcome status: 

Case-> Have the outcome (disease)

Controls-> Donot have the outcome;

Summary: Title and Methodology should be revised. 

15

Post Operative Complication of Femoral Neck Fracture Operation by Biplane Double Supported Screw Fixation Method (BDSF)

Mozumder B, Dey RP ,  Ghosh S, Akanda MMU, Das CK, Shohag AKMMH

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86292

Biplab Mozumder

Dr. Sariful Hasan

Dr. Latiful Bari

1. SUMMARY OF THE STUDY

The authors present a single-group, prospective clinical study evaluating postoperative complications following femoral neck fracture management using the Biplane Double-Supported Screw Fixation (BDSF) method in a tertiary hospital in Bangladesh. Thirty patients were analyzed, reporting low rates of complications.

2. EDITORIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EJMCJ SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

3. SCIENTIFIC QUALITY EVALUATION

Strengths

• Relevant topic within orthopedic trauma.
• Prospective design.
• Clear reporting of complications.
• BDSF technique is less studied in Bangladesh—adds local value.

Major Weaknesses

1. Methodology lacks essential details
   • Inclusion/exclusion criteria not fully described.
   • No description of BDSF surgical steps.
   • No information on follow-up duration or schedule.
   • No sample size justification.
   • Missing postoperative protocol.
2. Statistical analysis is minimal
   • Only descriptive statistics provided.
   • No inferential analysis.
   • No confidence intervals or p-values.
3. Results section contains formatting errors
   • Table IV is incorrectly aligned and confusing.
   • Figures not included, only textual reference to “Bar diagram” (figure missing).
   • Percentages calculated based on 30 but follow-up mentions 28—needs clarification.
4. Discussion is shallow
   • Limited critical interpretation.
   • Limited comparison with global data.
   • Needs acknowledgment of potential bias (single center, small sample, non-random sampling).
5. References not in Vancouver style
   • Needs standardized punctuation, journal abbreviations, volume/issue/page order.
6. Language requires polishing
   • Several grammatical, structural, and syntax issues.
   • Needs professional academic language editing.

4. ETHICAL & RESEARCH INTEGRITY ISSUES

• Ethical approval is stated but lacking approval number.
• No mention of informed consent from participants.
• No details on conflict-of-interest or funding (acceptable but can be improved).

5. DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS (INTERNATIONAL REVIEWER STANDARD)

A. Major Revisions Required

1. Reformat abstract into standard structured format.
2. Rewrite methodology with full transparency:
   • Study design
   • Setting
   • Inclusion and exclusion criteria
   • Sampling process
   • Preoperative evaluation
   • Operative technique (BDSF steps)
   • Postoperative care and follow-up schedule
   • Outcome measures and definitions
   • Statistical analysis plan
3. Revise tables into journal-compliant format
   • Remove vertical lines
   • Standardized headings
   • Ensure consistent numerical decimals
   • Fix Table IV formatting errors
4. Include missing figures and label them properly (Figure 1, Figure 2 etc.).
5. Improve discussion
   • Stronger comparison with global studies
   • Explain possible reasons for lower complication rates
   • Add limitations of the study
   • Suggest future research directions
6. Fix inconsistent numbers (30 patients enrolled vs. 28 followed up).
7. Rewrite references following Vancouver style strictly.

B. Minor Revisions

1. Improve clarity of language, sentence structure.
2. Correct typographic errors (spacing, capitalization, alignment).
3. Ensure all abbreviations are defined at first use.
4. Add MeSH-compliant keywords.
5. Rephrase title for clarity (suggested below).

6. SUGGESTED IMPROVED TITLE OPTIONS

• “Postoperative Complications After Biplane Double-Supported Screw Fixation in Femoral Neck Fractures: A Prospective Clinical Study”
• “Clinical Outcomes and Complication Profile of BDSF Technique in Femoral Neck Fracture: A Prospective Study”

7. EDITORIAL DECISION (RECOMMENDED)

Decision: Major Revision Required
The manuscript has scientific merit but requires substantial improvement in presentation, methodology, referencing, and formatting to meet the standards of East West Medical College Journal and international medical journals.

16

Photo-Anthropometric Study of Lateral Wall of Fully Ossified Dry Human Orbital Cavities

Morium U, Mousumi J, Naznin R, Munni TA, Hossain F, Khan FI

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86296

Umma Morium

Prof. Rubina Qasim

Dr. Sumaiya Khatun

Overall Editorial Decision:

 Major Revision Required

General Editorial Comments

This manuscript presents a photo-anthropometric morphometric analysis of the lateral orbital wall, a topic of relevance to anatomists, ophthalmologists, maxillofacial surgeons, neurosurgeons, forensic experts, and reconstructive surgeons. The subject is scientifically valid, and the sample size of 200 orbital cavities from 100 skulls is appreciable.

However, the manuscript in its current form does not meet the scientific, methodological, linguistic, and formatting standards of East West Medical College Journal. Substantial revision is required before reconsideration for publication.

Major Issues (Must be Addressed)

1. Ethical Approval & Source of Specimens (Mandatory Clarification)

• The manuscript does not mention ethical approval or institutional permission for using human skeletal specimens.
• Please clearly state:
  • Name of ethical review committee
  • Approval/reference number
  • Consent and legal sourcing of skeletal materials

Example:

Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethical Review Committee of Dhaka Medical College (Approval No: ……). All specimens were legally obtained from the departmental bone bank following institutional guidelines.

2. Study Objective & Hypothesis Not Clearly Defined

• Objectives are vaguely stated.
• Please rewrite objectives in clear bullet points:
  • Primary objective
  • Secondary objective
• Include explicit research hypothesis.

3. Methodology Needs Significant Improvement

a) Sampling Method

• No explanation of:
  • Sample selection criteria
  • Age estimation
  • Sex determination
  • Exclusion criteria

b) Standardization of Photography

• Add detailed description of:
  • Camera positioning reproducibility
  • Calibration technique
  • Inter-observer and intra-observer variability

c) Validation of Photographic Method

• Only 10 skulls used for calibration — justify statistically.
• Provide:
  • Reliability testing
  • Measurement error analysis

4. Statistical Analysis Deficiencies

• Statistical methods are inadequately described.
• Please include:
  • Software used (e.g., SPSS version)
  • Normality testing
  • Confidence intervals
  • Effect size
  • Justification of paired t-test

5. Results Section – Interpretation Weak

• Mostly descriptive without clinical interpretation.
• Provide:
  • Clinical significance of differences
  • Graphical representation (bar charts / scatter plots)

6. Discussion Needs Rewriting

• Current discussion is:
  • Repetitive
  • Grammatically weak
  • Poorly structured

Needs:

• Clear comparison with recent literature
• Better explanation of:
  • Clinical relevance
  • Surgical application
  • Anthropological importance

7. Language, Grammar & Scientific Writing

• Significant English language errors throughout.
• Professional English editing is mandatory.
• Examples:
  • “There is any difference exist” → Whether any difference exists
  • “No significant differences was observed” → No significant difference was observed

8. Reference Formatting & Updating

• Many references are:
  • Old
  • Poorly formatted
  • Not according to Vancouver style

Required:

• Uniform Vancouver referencing
• Inclusion of recent (2015–2025) references

Minor Issues (Should be Corrected)

1. Title Refinement

Suggested revised title:

Photo-Anthropometric Morphometric Analysis of the Lateral Wall of Fully Ossified Human Orbital Cavities

2. Abstract Restructuring

• Follow structured format:
  • Background
  • Objective
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Conclusion

3. Tables & Figures

• Improve:
  • Table layout
  • Unit uniformity (mm)
  • Caption clarity

4. Keywords Improvement

• Add:
  • Orbital morphometry
  • Forensic anatomy
  • Craniofacial anthropometry

Scientific Strengths of the Study

• Adequate sample size
• Novel photographic measurement technique
• Clinically useful anatomical data
• Applicability in:
  • Orbital surgery
  • Neurosurgery
  • Forensic medicine
  • Anthropology

Final Editorial Recommendation

Major Revision Required

The manuscript has good scientific merit, but substantial revisions are mandatory before reconsideration. Authors are advised to:

• Strengthen methodology
• Improve statistical rigor
• Rewrite discussion
• Correct language extensively
• Update references

17

Unlocking Relief: A Comprehensive study for a Safer and earlier Recovery by microscopic fenestration and discectomy for PLID

Bhuiyan SM, Nandi AK, Yasmin T, Shohan AKMNF, Islam MN, Rashid MH

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86294

Dr. Sharif Bhuiyan

Prof. S. M. Noman Khaled Chowdhury

Dr. Nazmin Ahmed

I.                    Abstract: Lacks result, outcome and conclusion section. Include the information within the non-structured abstract.

II.                 Introduction: Avoid subtitles. Include in text citation with appropriate reference. Introduction must be concised, scientifically sound and highlight the key objectives of this study, following background information.

III.              Methodology section: The guideline already establish the favourable neurological outcome after microscopic fenestration and discectomy. If you compare with endoscopic discectomy in a age and sex matched cohort, then the findings and interpretation will be valuable. Moreover, to conclude the procedure as a better option, long term follow up needed. The article must contain the follow up period.

IV.              Result section: Table 4: Compare the weakness grading in MRC scale, not by the number of the patients with a vague result. It is rare for immediate post operative improvement of muscle power after fenestration & discectomy surgery. Beside this, muscle improvement needs regular physiotherapy. The article didn’t mention about the post operative follow up visit and rehabilitation methods, which limits the transperancy of the result.

Table 5: Correct the term ‘’sensory weakness’’. In the result section, summarize the findings and elaborate the legends of the table separately.

V.                Add representative figures of preoperative, intraoperative and post operative images. Important surgical steps should be labelled and arranged sequentially with appropriate figure legend.

VI.              Cauda equina syndrome patients need more wide decompression, often beyond the traditional fenestration and discectomy. Beside this, regaining motor power and autonomic function need time following proper rehabilitation. Include the information in respective section.

VII.           Mention the novelty of your research article.

VIII.        Authors are encouraged to include appropriate, recent references in the reference list with proper in text citation, following the journal guideline.

IX.              Add list of Abbreviation, CREDIT authorship contribution, Funding information, Competing interest, Consent from declaration, IRB approval number and Acknowledgement section.

X.                Overall manuscript suffers significant redundancy, multiple spelling mistakes with some awkward phrasing which limits the readability of the article.

From my perspective, I encourage the authors to rewrite the manuscript considering the concerning points and resubmit to the journal.

18

Stabilization and Fixation of Spondylolisthesis by Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion- TLIF : A Journey of Discovery

Bhuiyan SM, Nandi AK, Yasmin T, Shohan AKMNF, Islam MN, Rashid MH

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86295

Dr. Sharif Bhuiyan

Prof. S. M. Noman Khaled Chowdhury

Dr. Nazmin Ahmed

PART A: REVIEW AS PER EWMCJ REVIEWERS’ GUIDELINE

Overall Recommendation

Major Revision Required

The manuscript addresses a relevant neurosurgical topic suitable for the East West Medical College Journal. However, significant revisions are required regarding study design clarity, consistency of data, ethical declarations, scientific tone, statistical presentation, and English language quality before it can be considered for publication.

1. Title

Issue: The title is narrative and non‑scientific (“A Journey of Discovery”).

EWMCJ Requirement: Concise, objective, scientific titles.

Recommendation: Revise to a neutral, outcome‑based title.

2. Abstract

Issues Identified: – Not structured – Excessive background, limited results – Grammar and spelling errors – Inconsistent sample size (21 vs 22)

EWMCJ Requirement: Structured abstract (Background, Objective, Methods, Results, Conclusion).

3. Introduction

Strengths: – Covers definition and etiology

Weaknesses: – Overly descriptive – Repetition of textbook content – Lacks research gap and justification

4. Objectives

Issue: Objective stated as a conclusion.

Correction Needed: Clearly defined general and specific objectives.

5. Methods and Materials

Major Concerns: – Retrospective cohort not clearly justified – No ethical approval statement – Inclusion/exclusion criteria inconsistent with results (Grade III–V included but excluded in methods) – No statistical analysis section

6. Results

Issues: – Tables contain numerical inconsistencies – Percentages missing or incorrect – Meyerding grades inconsistent across sections – No statistical comparison (VAS, ODI)

7. Discussion

Issues: – Overstated claims (“99% success”) without data – Repetition of results – Inaccurate description of TLIF as endoscopic – Limited comparison with literature

8. Conclusion

Issues: – Overgeneralized – Not strictly derived from results

9. Ethical & Publication Issues

Missing: – Ethical approval – Informed consent – Conflict of interest – Funding statement

10. Language

Major revision required due to grammar, spelling, and academic tone.

PART B: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

General Response

We sincerely thank the reviewers for their valuable comments. All concerns have been carefully addressed, and the manuscript has been extensively revised to improve scientific rigor, clarity, and compliance with EWMCJ guidelines.

Comment: Title is non‑scientific
Response: Title revised to a concise, scientific format.

Revised Title:
Outcome of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Comment: Abstract not structured
Response: Abstract rewritten in structured format and sample size corrected (n=21).

Comment: Objectives improperly stated
Response: Objectives redefined using standard scientific wording.

Comment: Ethical and statistical details missing
Response: Ethical approval, informed consent, and statistical methods have been added.

Comment: Results inconsistent
Response: All tables revised, numerical inconsistencies corrected, and outcomes clarified.

Comment: Discussion overstated
Response: Discussion rewritten with evidence‑based interpretation and literature comparison.

PART C: REVISED MANUSCRIPT

Title

Outcome of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Abstract

Background: Lumbar spondylolisthesis is a common cause of chronic low back pain and radiculopathy. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) provides spinal stability and neural decompression through a posterior approach.

Objective: To evaluate clinical and functional outcomes of TLIF in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at ZHSWMH, Dhanmondi, Dhaka, from January 2023 to December 2024. Twenty‑one patients aged ≥18 years with Meyerding grade I–II lumbar spondylolisthesis underwent TLIF. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

Results: The study included 9 males and 12 females with a mean age of 45±6 years. Mean VAS score improved from 6.85±1.36 preoperatively to 4.04±1.55 postoperatively. ODI demonstrated significant improvement with no patients having severe or crippling disability at follow‑up. Mean hospital stay was 4±1.2 days.

Conclusion: TLIF is a safe and effective surgical option for lumbar spondylolisthesis, providing significant pain reduction, functional improvement, and early postoperative recovery.

Keywords: Lumbar spondylolisthesis, Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, TLIF, Surgical outcome

Introduction

Lumbar spondylolisthesis is characterized by anterior displacement of a vertebral body over the subjacent vertebra, commonly affecting the L4–L5 or L5–S1 levels. Patients may present with mechanical back pain, radiculopathy, or neurogenic claudication. When conservative treatment fails, surgical stabilization and decompression are indicated. TLIF offers circumferential fusion with minimal neural retraction and has gained wide acceptance.

Objectives

General Objective: – To evaluate the clinical outcome of TLIF in lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Specific Objectives: – To assess pain reduction using VAS – To evaluate functional outcome using ODI – To determine perioperative outcomes and hospital stay

Materials and Methods

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study

Place: ZHSWMH, Dhanmondi, Dhaka

Duration: January 2023 – December 2024

Sample Size: 21 patients

Inclusion Criteria: – Age ≥18 years – Meyerding grade I–II lumbar spondylolisthesis – Failed conservative management ≥6 months

Exclusion Criteria: – Previous lumbar surgery – Osteoporosis or active infection – Congenital anomalies

Ethical Consideration: Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional review committee. Written informed consent was taken from all patients.

Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics were applied.

Results

TLIF resulted in significant improvement in pain and functional status. No major perioperative complications were observed.

Discussion

The present study demonstrates that TLIF provides effective stabilization and symptom relief in lumbar spondylolisthesis. The findings are consistent with previously published literature reporting improved functional outcomes and reduced hospital stay following TLIF.

Limitations

·         Small sample size

·         Retrospective design

·         Short follow‑up duration

Conclusion

TLIF is a safe and effective surgical technique for managing lumbar spondylolisthesis, offering significant pain relief, functional improvement, and early mobilization.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

Funding

No external funding was received.

References

(Formatted according to Vancouver style and EWMCJ guidelines)

19

Flamm and Geiger scoring system: Prediction of successful vaginal birth after Caesarean section (VBAC)

Akhter M, Ferdousi M, Sultana J, Rahman RRB

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86466

Dr. Marufa Akhter

Dr. Saad Mohammad

Dr. Sharmin Yeasmin

General Comments

This manuscript addresses a highly relevant and timely obstetric issue, particularly in the context of rising Caesarean section rates in Bangladesh and other low- and middle-income countries. The use of the Flamm and Geiger scoring system to predict VBAC success is appropriate, clinically meaningful, and aligned with evidence-based obstetric practice. The study is generally well structured, clearly written, and supported by current literature. With some revisions, the manuscript has good potential for publication in the East West Medical College Journal.

Strengths

1. Relevant and practical topic: VBAC prediction is crucial for reducing unnecessary repeat Caesarean sections.
2. Prospective observational design: Enhances data reliability.
3. Use of a validated scoring system: The Flamm and Geiger score is simple, low-cost, and applicable in resource-limited settings.
4. Clear results: The association between higher scores (≥5) and VBAC success is well demonstrated.
5. Comprehensive discussion: Findings are appropriately compared with regional and international studies.
6. Good ethical and clinical relevance: Supports individualized counseling and safer TOLAC practices.

Major Comments

1. Sample Size and Consistency

• There is inconsistency in sample numbers:
  • Methods mention 60 enrolled patients, but only 40 included in final analysis.
  • Abstract “Result” section incorrectly states “out of 40 patients” without explanation.

Recommendation:
Clearly explain attrition (why 20 patients were excluded) and ensure consistent reporting of sample size throughout the abstract, methods, results, and tables.

2. Statistical Methodology

• Some inconsistencies are noted:
  • Table 1 footnote indicates Chi-square and unpaired t-test, but superscripts (ᵃ, ᵇ) are mismatched.
  • Continuous variables (e.g., maternal age) should use t-test, categorical variables should use Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test.
• No confidence intervals are provided.
• Multivariable analysis was not performed, despite multiple predictors.

Recommendation:

• Correct statistical test labeling.
• Consider adding logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors of VBAC success.
• If not feasible, acknowledge this as a limitation.

3. Ethical Considerations

• There is no explicit statement of ethical approval or informed consent.

Recommendation:
Include a statement confirming:

• Ethical approval from an Institutional Review Board / Ethics Committee
• Written informed consent from participants

4. Neonatal Outcomes

• Neonatal outcomes (Apgar score, NICU admission, neonatal morbidity) were not evaluated.

Recommendation:
Mention neonatal outcomes if available, or clearly acknowledge their absence as a study limitation.

Minor Comments

Language and Style

• Overall language quality is good, but minor issues remain:
  • Occasional repetition in the Discussion
  • Minor grammatical and spacing inconsistencies (e.g., “obs & gynae”, spacing around percentages)

Recommendation:
A final language and copy-editing review is advised.

Tables and Figures

• Table numbering is confusing:
  • Two tables are labeled as “Table 1” (Flamm score and baseline characteristics).
• Figures are described but not clearly embedded.

Recommendation:

• Renumber tables sequentially.
• Ensure all tables and figures follow journal formatting guidelines.

References

• References are relevant and mostly current.
• Formatting inconsistencies exist (e.g., author initials, punctuation, journal title styles).

Recommendation:
Revise references strictly according to Vancouver style as per journal requirements.

Discussion and Interpretation

• The discussion appropriately interprets findings but occasionally implies causation rather than association.

Recommendation:
Use cautious language such as “associated with” rather than “leads to”.

Conclusion

The conclusion is appropriate and supported by the results. It clearly highlights the clinical applicability of the Flamm and Geiger scoring system in Bangladesh and similar settings.

Limitations

The authors have acknowledged several limitations. However, the following should be emphasized more clearly:

• Small sample size
• Single-center study
• Lack of neonatal outcome assessment
• Absence of multivariate analysis

Final Recommendation

Minor to Moderate Revision Required

The manuscript is scientifically sound, clinically relevant, and suitable for publication after addressing the issues outlined above, particularly regarding:

• Sample size clarification
• Statistical consistency
• Ethical approval statement
• Table/figure formatting

20

HLA-B27 Status and its Association with Clinical Manifestations of Ankylosing Spondylitis in Bangladesh

Akram A, Rahman M, Nafisa T, Resma TI, Siddique MAB, Huda MN, Islam F

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.87161

Dr. Arifa Akram

21

Effectiveness of Phenylephrine in the Treatment of Subarachnoid Block Induced Hypotension During Elective Caesarean Section – A Comparative Study with Ephedrine

Arman MUS, Shakir MS , Shahed MSR, Karim MM, Chowdhury MJ , Fuad HMW, Saha K

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.87058

Dr. Mesba Us Shahid Arman

Dr. Saad Mohammad

Dr. Marufa Akhter

Abstract: Reduce word

Introduction: Correct grammatical error

Methodology: Highlight the importance and relevance of the study

Discussion: Compare with recent relevant updated work

Write a better recommendation and conclusion.

Reference: Use recent articles not more than 10 years

Other Reviewer:

Since similar studies have already been conducted both in our country and abroad, it would be better to modify the title slightly. as any randomized controlled trial deserves appreciation,revising the title can be considered.

The title can be written like this :

” Effectiveness of Phenylephrine in the Treatment of Subarachnoid Block-Induced Hypo-tension During Elective Caesarean Section-

 A Single-Center Experience from a Private Medical College Hospital”.

as the sample size is not that large and the study period is also short, so the word “single center “can be used.

STUDY DESIGN: 

“double-blind ” ( no – ed) is slightly more standard when describing a study design. 

SAMPLE TECHNIQUE:

Purposive sampling is generally not acceptable in randomized controlled trial ( RCT ). acceptable  are –

1. Consecutive sampling

2. Simple random sampling

3. Stratified random sampling.

so it can be written by ” Eligible participants were recruited consecutively and randomly allocated to intervention and control group.”

INCLUSION CRITERIA: 

Full term pregnant women ( not parturients))  

TABLE 2: 

Shows the distribution of study patients according to induction to delivery time. However , the Methodology does not mention  whether labor induction was performed.

They probably meant : “Time from Spinal Anesthesia to Delivery” , not induction of labor.

22

Thoracic Segmental Spinal Anesthesia for Modified Radical Mastectomy: Narrative Review and Case-Series Synthesis

Shakir MS, Arman MUS, Shahed MSR, Karim MM, Chowdhury MJ , Fuad HMW, Saha K

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.86744

Dr. Muhammad Samius Shakir

Dr. Galib Md. Shawon

Prof. Maruf Bin Habib

Overall Editorial Decision:

Major Revision Required

General Comments

This manuscript addresses an important and clinically relevant topic: the application of thoracic segmental spinal anesthesia (TSSA) for modified radical mastectomy (MRM). The subject is timely and potentially impactful, especially for resource-limited settings. The authors have presented a prospective observational study with a reasonable sample size and clinically useful outcomes.

However, the manuscript requires substantial revision before it can be considered for publication. Several methodological, ethical, structural, language, statistical, and referencing issues must be addressed to meet the scientific and editorial standards of East West Medical College Journal.

With careful revision, this paper could become a valuable contribution to regional anesthesia literature.

Major Issues (Must be Addressed)

1. Ethical Approval Statement (Mandatory Correction)

• The manuscript does not mention Institutional Review Board (IRB) / Ethical Review Committee approval.
• Please clearly state:
  • Name of the Ethical Committee
  • Approval number
  • Date of approval
• Include confirmation of written informed consent.

Example:

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of East West Medical College and Hospital (Approval No: ……, Date: ……). Written informed consent was taken from all participants.

2. Study Design Clarity & Methodological Weakness

• The study is described as prospective observational, yet:
  • No sample size calculation is provided.
  • No justification for N = 100 is mentioned.
• Please include:
  • Sample size estimation method
  • Power calculation
  • Justification for chosen sample

3. Statistical Analysis Section Missing

• There is no formal statistical analysis section.
• Add a separate subsection titled “Statistical Analysis” describing:
  • Software used (e.g., SPSS version)
  • Statistical tests
  • Significance level (p-value)
  • Handling of missing data

4. Results Presentation Needs Improvement

• Results are largely descriptive without statistical interpretation.
• Provide:
  • Comparative analysis where possible
  • Mean ± SD and confidence intervals
  • Graphs/figures (if permitted)

5. Discussion Overextended and Redundant

• Discussion is excessively long, repetitive, and partially narrative.
• Needs:
  • Better literature comparison
  • Clear differentiation between your findings vs existing evidence
  • Reduced repetition
  • Stronger critical analysis

6. Reference Issues (Major Concern)

• Many references are:
  • Old (2000–2015)
  • Not directly relevant to breast surgery or thoracic spinal anesthesia
• Update references with recent studies (2018–2025).
• Follow Vancouver citation format strictly.
• Uniform referencing style must be ensured.

Minor Issues (Should be Corrected)

1. Language & Grammar

• Multiple grammatical and typographical errors exist.
• Professional English editing is required.
• Examples:
  • “insured incase” → ensured in case
  • “Hpothyroidism” → Hypothyroidism

2. Formatting & Journal Style

• Follow East West Medical College Journal formatting guideline:
  • Structured abstract
  • Uniform headings
  • Proper table formatting

3. Title Refinement

Current title is acceptable, but may be refined for clarity:

Suggested:

Thoracic Segmental Spinal Anesthesia as a Primary Anesthetic Technique for Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Prospective Observational Study

4. Abstract Restructuring

• Should be structured under:
  • Background
  • Objective
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Conclusion

5. Units, Dosage & Drug Names Standardization

• Standardize:
  • Drug dosages (e.g., mcg → µg)
  • Units (mmHg, mg, ml)

Scientific Strengths of the Study

• Clinically relevant topic
• Good sample size
• Practical anesthetic technique
• Important implications for low-resource settings
• Zero conversion to GA is notable

Final Editorial Recommendation

Major Revision Required

The manuscript has good clinical potential, but significant revisions are required in:

• Ethics documentation
• Study methodology
• Statistical rigor
• Language and formatting
• References

23

Prevalence of Dengue and Chikungunya, Along With Their Seasonal Variations Among Febrile Patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh, in 2025.

Khatun S, Johora FT, Munny NN, Zafrin CA, Chowdhury MZU

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.87353

Dr. Sumaiya Khatun

Dr. Nur Nahar Ayrin

Dr. Maruf Bin Habib

Manuscript Title:

Prevalence of Dengue and Chikungunya, Along With Their Seasonal Variations Among Febrile Patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh, in 2025

Overall Recommendation: MAJOR REVISION REQUIRED

1. General Comments:

The manuscript addresses an important public health issue in Bangladesh, particularly the co-circulation of dengue and chikungunya. The large sample size is a strength. However, the manuscript requires substantial revision in methodology clarity, statistical analysis, language quality, referencing, and adherence to international reporting guidelines (STROBE).

2. Title:

Appropriate but slightly long.

Consider simplifying for clarity.

3. Abstract:

Needs structured format (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusion).

Include study design explicitly.

Avoid repetition and improve clarity of percentages.

4. Introduction:

Well detailed but overly lengthy.

Some references outdated or improperly cited. Please include references within last 10 years.

Needs better focus on study rationale and research gap.

5. Materials & Methods:

Major concerns:

Sampling method unclear (consecutive? convenience?).

 Inclusion/exclusion criteria poorly defined.

 Ethical approval number missing.

 No sample size calculation mentioned.

 Diagnostic criteria need clearer standardization.

 Laboratory methods lack detail (kits, sensitivity/specificity).

 Potential selection bias (single diagnostic center).

6. Statistical Analysis:

 Only descriptive statistics used.

 No inferential statistics.

 No confidence intervals.

 No p-values for comparisons.

 Recommend advanced analysis (trend analysis, regression).

7. Results:

 Data presentation acceptable but can be improved.

 Tables need formatting as per journal style.

 Figures not adequately described.

 Some inconsistencies in percentages.

8. Discussion:

 Contains good contextual explanation.

 However, overly verbose.

 Some speculative statements without references.

 Needs clearer comparison with recent literature.

9. Limitations:

 Mentioned but insufficient.

 Should include:

  – Single-center bias

  – Lack of co-infection analysis

  – Diagnostic limitations

10. Conclusion:

 Acceptable but should be more concise and evidence-based.

11. References:

 Formatting inconsistent.

 Some DOIs incorrect.

 Web references not standardized.

 Needs uniform Vancouver style.

12. Language & Grammar:

 Requires major editing.

 Repetition and grammatical errors present.

13. Ethical Issues:

 Ethical approval needs IRB reference number. (We can consider it as per our conversation)

Consent process should be clearly described.

14. Strengths:

Large sample size

Year-round data

Public health relevance

15. Weaknesses:

 Methodological limitations

 Lack of advanced statistical analysis

 Single-center data

 Language issues

Final Decision:

Revision is required before reconsideration for publication.

24

Brucellosis: The Great Mimicker Presenting as Acute Myocarditis and Pyrexia of Unknown Origin in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Muhib MM, Faruk AA, Sunny SS, Ahmed J

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.88123

Mushtaq Mutashid Muhib

Dr. Aga Farhan

Dr. Md. Marufur Rahman

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted

Case Reporting format should be used.

25

Ectopic Pancreas presenting as a gastric submucosal mass with diagnostic dilemma – a case report.

Mohammed S, Ullah AKMA, Shawon GM, Rahman MA, Sarder MNI

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/ewmcj.v14i2.87721

Dr. Saad Mohammad

Prof. Anowarul Kadir

Prof. KABM Taiful Alam

Strength of Manuscript: Adequate

Importance of findings: Crucial

Decision: Accepted