Dear all,
I believe that it is not acceptable to publish an article in a widely distributed journal without giving any chance for the readers to comment on this published article.
I wrote before to the editor of BMC Urology journal about this critical limitation in the journal website, without any response.
Today I was astonished when I have an article published in BMC urology about a comparative analysis of two methods of neonatal circumcision:
https://bmcurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12894-024-01513-9#Fun
The article carrying a lot of limitations and misleading, how such article passed ethical evaluation?: the surgeon doing the procedure wearing a watch in his hand while he is doing the procedure.
The attached video for the procedure done showing a stressed baby with an abdominal respiration and tachypnea.
The provided photo for the acceptable outcome of the circumcision, as the author believe, is a scared, phimotic and dysplastic penile scar.
https://bmcurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12894-024-01513-9/figures/5
What was the role of the reviewers and the editor to approve such fatal mistakes??
With my Best regard
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Microbiology
- Virology
- Virus