Peer review for assignments about (Peripheral Nerve Stimulation by MR Assignment

Peer review for assignments about (Peripheral Nerve Stimulation by MR gradient coils) - Assignment ExampleOverview of the clause Bottgers paper, Peripheral governing body stimulation by MR gradient coils, is organized into subsections with a well-outlined abstract and a conclusion. The abstract outlines the papers objective of discussing and understanding Peripheral nerve stimulation that results from operation of MR gradient coils in imaging. The abstract also outlines the papers key contents such as occurrence of peripheral nerve stimulation, methods for reducing the occurrence, allow PNS thresholds that the body can sustain involved risks in the applied science, and effects of the technologys use. The author describes magnetic resonance as a powerful and important 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 interpret the brain. The auth or also establishes the emergency for care in application of the technology because while high resolution images requires high strength pulse and powerful motionless 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 articles objective. It develops suspense by exploration of content headline but not actual information, a feature that can motivate a lector 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 quotation of its sources of information. Re liability 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 vigours on patients (Rummeny and Reimer 2009, p. 33). Schultz also supports the authors position on causes of the stimulation, varying magnetic fields (2013, p. 4). Application of diagrams and tables also enhances the articles ability to communicate to the audience. Affirmations A number of fears, despite the positive attributes, however arise from the articles content with respect to its aims and headings. Some of the articles 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 de finition 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