You are here

Response to Research Article Pt. 2 Updated(PP2)

Submitted by ncarbone on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 20:00

Despite the study having many positive findings it is lacking many important aspects. These gaps are important to the study and can make it unreliable. First, there are no control subjects to compare the DPN subjects to (no non-diabetic subjects or diabetic subjects without DPN). Therefore it is not a randomized study with a placebo present. The participants are all older individuals with a wide range of diabetes duration (12.2 years). The authors also do not define what stage of neuropathy the patients are experiencing at any point in the study. Also, there is no specific regimen on what equipment is used for exercise training. Although it is a supervised exercise intervention, the subjects are allowed to choose from a variety of options and are only encouraged to utilize different equipment. A nerve conduction study is used to test conduction velocity, motor action potential, and amplitude, but no significant changes were found. Lastly, skin biopsies are used to test intraepidermal nerve fiber density and epidermal axon branching. 

Post:

Comments

try to avoid using words like "many" and "important" as they don't bring much value to the sentences. also try to replace the words "it is" with whatever you are talking about because it can get confusing to follow what you're reffering to.

Be sure to specify what study you are talking about in your paragraph because as a reader I have no prior knowledge of what study you are referring to, hence it can be a bit confusing to follow. However you have a nice use of technical terms throughout.