- Email: [email protected]
Peer review report 2 on “An audit on the use of chaperones during intimate patient examinations”
Annals of Medicine and Surgery 5 Supplement 1 (2016) S121
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Annals of Medicine and Surgery journal homepage: www.annalsjournal.com
Peer review report
Peer review report 2 on “An audit on the use of chaperones during intimate patient examinations”
1. Original submission 1.1. Recommendation Minor Revision.
1.2. Comments to the author This article examines the medicolegal aspects of medicine that are becoming more and more pervasive into clinical practice. There were minor spelling and grammar mistakes which should be addressed. Abstract - Please state the title of the GMC guideline being referred to and then give the guideline number - Clinical exams should be stated in full before abbreviation - Methods should be its own section Methods
DOI of published article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.019 2049-0801
- This should also include a brief description of the re-audit, and the period of time that elapsed between the initial data collection and the second one. Results - Was there a record of whether the patient declined a chaperone? - Re-audit results may be better as a separate paragraph. Also please avoid the notation “n ¼ 53 … ” please describe it in full (unless you include these abbreviations beforehand at the first instance in which they could be used). References Please be uniform with the reference format. Overall An interesting audit regarding chaperones. Thank you to the author for submitting. It is very close to the standard required for publication, but please address the above points. Anonymous reviewer.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Annals of Medicine and Surgery journal homepage: www.annalsjournal.com
Peer review report
Peer review report 2 on “An audit on the use of chaperones during intimate patient examinations”
1. Original submission 1.1. Recommendation Minor Revision.
1.2. Comments to the author This article examines the medicolegal aspects of medicine that are becoming more and more pervasive into clinical practice. There were minor spelling and grammar mistakes which should be addressed. Abstract - Please state the title of the GMC guideline being referred to and then give the guideline number - Clinical exams should be stated in full before abbreviation - Methods should be its own section Methods
DOI of published article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.019 2049-0801
- This should also include a brief description of the re-audit, and the period of time that elapsed between the initial data collection and the second one. Results - Was there a record of whether the patient declined a chaperone? - Re-audit results may be better as a separate paragraph. Also please avoid the notation “n ¼ 53 … ” please describe it in full (unless you include these abbreviations beforehand at the first instance in which they could be used). References Please be uniform with the reference format. Overall An interesting audit regarding chaperones. Thank you to the author for submitting. It is very close to the standard required for publication, but please address the above points. Anonymous reviewer.