Peer review for assignments about (Peripheral Nerve Stimulation by MR gradient coils) - Assignment Example

Overview of the article Bottger’s paper, ‘Peripheral nerve stimulation by MR gradient coils,’ is organized into subsections with a well-outlined abstract and a conclusion. The abstract outlines the paper’s objective of discussing and understanding Peripheral nerve stimulation that results from application of MR gradient coils in imaging. The abstract also outlines the paper’s key contents such as occurrence of peripheral nerve stimulation, methods for reducing the occurrence, appropriate PNS thresholds that the body can sustain involved risks in the technology, and effects of the technology’s use.

The author describes magnetic resonance as a powerful and significant tool for imaging and that can obtain high-level resolution without using ionizing radiation. The tool also helps in investigating organ function, to investigate vivo chemistry and to visualize the brain. The author also establishes the need for care in application of the technology because while high resolution images requires high strength pulse and powerful static magnetic fields, these increase chances of peripheral nerve stimulation and also risks care personnel within the imaging facility.

The paper also seeks to define peripheral nerve stimulation, identify its causes and where it occurs, and discusses threshold values for imaging and strategies for reducing effects of peripheral nerve stimulation. Commendations The abstract offers a comprehensive overview of the paper and succeeds in communicating the article’s objective. It develops suspense by exploration of content headline but not actual information, a feature that can motivate a reader into the article. The author also uses simple and precise headings that are outlined conspicuously.

Another outstanding element of the article is its attained credibility through reliance and acknowledgement of its sources of information. Reliability of offered information is another feature of the article because of consistency of offered information to other sources. Its argument that peripheral nerve stimulation causes pain, for example, is consistent with the observation that the technology may have irritable effects such as twitching of muscles on patients (Rummeny and Reimer 2009, p. 33).

Schultz also supports the author’s position on causes of the stimulation, varying magnetic fields (2013, p. 4). Application of diagrams and tables also enhances the article’s ability to communicate to the audience. Affirmations A number of concerns, despite the positive attributes, however arise from the article’s content with respect to its aims and headings. Some of the article’s content is not consistent with its headings. The author does not seem to define PNS while the heading, ‘what is PNS?

’ suggest the need for the definition. The audience anticipates an explicit or inferred definition but none appears. Like in the abstract, a definition of PNS is necessary to make the title relevant. The same concern arises with respect to the heading, ‘what are the causes of PNS’ because no explicit causes, except involved mechanism towards the stimulation, are offered. One of the possible responses would “changes at the neuromuscular junction or muscle level” (Tranquilli, Thurmon and Grimm 2013, p. 429). Significant inconsistency also exists between the abstract and headings, which communicates the author’