Average rating: | Rated 2.5 of 5. |
Level of importance: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Level of validity: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Level of completeness: | Rated 2 of 5. |
Level of comprehensibility: | Rated 1 of 5. |
Competing interests: | None |
This article deals with an interesting topic, although it does not provide important insights in the argument, It can be useful as shared experience on a quite rare clinical situation. Unfortunately, in the introduction and in the case report, the authors write in an incorrect English with frequent errors in grammar and sentence construction. Improper use of words/literary translation instead of correct medical terms/grammar ( eg. boy, to do, use of saxon genitive.. ) are frequent.
After the authors will provide corrections with a native English speaker,s help, the paper will be certainly more fluent and comprehensible.