Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01508-4 (2020)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Developing the 
Patient Health Questionnaire-8 for 
a greater impact on the
quality of life of patients with functional dyspepsia compared to 
Somatic
Symptom Scale-8
Version: 
1 
Date: 
08 Jun 2020
Reviewer's report:
The paper would be more suitable for a statistic journal rather than for a clinical
one. 
I would recommend that the authors:
- review the real objective of this publication
- correlate the conclusion to the objectives
- organize better the methods in a more didactic way, with the information that
really matter for the reader (e.g. HOW the questionnaires were applied? HOW
CONSENT was obtained from patients?
- review English language with a professional company and make it more fluent.
- review all the tables and make them INDEPENDENT of the text. They are
ALL confusing, full of non-sense abbreviations, and meaningless. 
Maybe it would be better to split the publication focusing in the clinical
applicability and clinical scenario for BMC Gastroenterology, and the extensive
confusing methods with innumerable abbreviations in a publication targeting
data scientists. 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the
authors.
No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
No
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you
recommend an additional statistical review?
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects
require further assessment in your comments to the editors.
I recommend additional statistical review
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following
questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or
salary from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way
gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now
or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the
content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of
the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this
paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing
interests' below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available
under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY License (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial
office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note
you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and
confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we
will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)