Structured PREreview of Oropouche Fever Associated with Combined Central and Peripheral Demyelination (CCPD): A Case Report from Ceará, Brazil, 2024

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Yes

The introduction of the Preprint clearly explains the objectives of the paper making it an appropriate section. It provided the background to the study and also reason for this case report

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Highly appropriate

The case report methodological approach was clearly stated. However, the author did not provide justification for choosing plasma apheresis over other immunomodulators

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Highly supported

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

I don’t know

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Somewhat clearly

The discussion of their findings seems to be somewhat clear because the paper didn't justify the reason why the laboratory findings is not aligning with their diagnosis as this condition seems to be an autoimmune disorder. Also, their cell count and differential seems to be inappropriate because how can it be justified to have the percentage reported in Lymphocytes and neutrophils when the cell count is just 2cells/ul.

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

Highly likely

The Preprint clearly calls for public awareness of the neurological defect with OROV infection and also calls for public health action as this is a major concern to the outbreak. This Preprint also reveals the need to strengthen surveillance towards the detection of the infection to prevent morbidity and mortality from the outbreak

Would it benefit from language editing?

No

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, it’s of high quality

Provided the suggestion raised are addressed

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

Yes, after minor changes

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.