Topic Review - Newest First (only newest 5 are displayed)

docosama

Re: Gynaecomastia

I have read the article and found following major flaws:

1. Title seems like a book chapter.
2. No Endocrinologist is in the author's list.
3. In Abstract, 30 patients listed in materials /methods is written twice. Conclusion drawn as "most common benign disease in male breast" ? how authors have concluded that when the sample size is just 30 patients? 2nd conclusion is also dawn incorrect because they haven't followed the patients for 2 years.
4. What benefit did the authors got after doing the study which is already known?
5. How sample size was calculated?
6. Serum testosterone, TSH, Estradiol wasnt done and even then conclusions were made.
7. How idiopathic gynecomastia was diagnosed?
8. Were they any side effects noted after treatment with Tamoxifen? and what was the followup rates?
9. Which drugs caused Gynecomastia?
10. Hypogonadism is one of the major cause of gynecomastia and authors havent included a single patient in the study.
9. What contribution did the study added in the medical literature?



[Edited by docosama on 01-08-2010 at 06:05 PM GMT]

bvhospital

Gynaecomastia

I would request the readers to read the following article Published in The Professional about management of GYNAECOMASTIA.
http://www.theprofesional.com/v17n2/prof-1476.pdf
Shabbir A, Hussain S, Rehan TM, Baig MU. Gynaecomastia; Management and causative factors. Professional Med J Jun 2010;17(2): 205-
210