 |
| About Bioline | All Journals | Testimonials | Membership | News |
|
||||||
|
||||||
Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology, Vol. 24, No. 3, July-September, 2006, pp. 239 Correspondence Author's reply Vinod Kumar CS, Neelagund YF Division of Research in Medical Sciences, P G Studies and Research in Microbiology, Gulbarga University, Gulbarga - 585 106, Karnataka Code Number: mb06073 Related articles: mb05081, mb06072 Dear Editor, We thank Randhawa et al for their comments on our paper. Four main issues have been raised by them, the first issue pertains to scientific validity of the study and others regarding the selection criteria, type of media used and identification procedures adopted. Regarding the first, we have clearly stated what methods were used. The manuscript was passed through the peer review process where in this question was also raised. Based on their suggestions, we had included the limitation of the method in the discussion. Dr. Randhawa is requested to go through the guidelines for authors to know regarding the scope and limitation under the correspondence section. Secondly, regarding the number of samples and identification of the organisms isolated, we have clearly mentioned regarding the sample size and identification techniques with reference quoted (no.3,4) Thirdly, regarding the constituent of the medium used, Brain heart infusion broth with 0.02% sodium polyanethol was used to increase the culture positivity rate. With respect to asymptomatic and symptomatic cases, we have clearly mentioned that the study group comprised of 1647 suspected septicaemic cases, hence the question regarding asymptomatic does not arise. Finally, though we share the concern of the readers we feel that they are misplaced in this instance. Copyright 2006 - Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology |
| |||||||||
