What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
Authors do make a good teaching point that AVN should be considered as a differential diagnosis in the setting of coccydynia.
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No. Rare but Well known entity, especially if you take into account previous hx of steroids usage & AVN.
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
Yes
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
nope. Index patient had coccydynia but not AVN.
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
Not applicable.
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
Not applicable.
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
Not applicable
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
No.
Other Comments:
Good discussuion.
Competing interests:
Invited by the author to review this article? : No
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?: No
References:
None
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
YES
How to cite: Arora, MD, FAAP, FAAEM R .Misleading - Index patient had coccydynia but not AVN. [Review of the article 'Avascular Necrosis (AVN) of the Coccyx as a Cause of Coccydynia (Tailbone Pain) ' by Jow S].WebmedCentral 2019;10(2):WMCRW003407
Authors do make a good teaching point that AVN should be considered as a differential diagnosis in the setting of coccydynia.
No. Rare but Well known entity, especially if you take into account previous hx of steroids usage & AVN.
Yes
nope. Index patient had coccydynia but not AVN.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable
No.
Good discussuion.
No
No
None
YES