Review for 10.1186/s12876-016-0501-9 (2016)

Reviewer ’s report  
Title : Clinical efficacy of adalimumab in Crohn's disease: a real practice observational study in 
Japan  
 
Version:  0 Date:  18 Jan 2016  
 
Reviewer:  Daniel Leske  
 
Reviewer's rep ort: 
There are several points which should be adressed before publication:  
- Studies given names such as yours are normally experimental studies with an intervention, 
yours is an observational study. Your Treatment protocol shows to my mind that you did a 
retrospective chart review, not a prospective study. There is no shame in that but it should be 
more clea rly stated what kind of study it is and how you collected your data. You do state it 
is an obervational study but you make it appear as if your data was collected prospectively.  
- the title is somewhat confusing to me. Upon reading it at first I thought y our study is about 
preventing postoperative recurrence. However only at the very end did I realise respectively 
it becomes apparent that postoperative recurrence is only a subgroup analysis.  
- Considering it is a retrospective chart review (or is not, I c annot tell?), your sample size is 
fairly small, as you correctly pointed out  
- The fact that adalimumab is effective in crohn's disease is a point nobody would argue with. 
That makes me wonder what your study adds to current knowledge? You shoould try to 
carve that point out.  
 
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 t o the authors.  
Yes 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
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 am able to assess the statistics  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
Acceptable  
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, f ees, 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 t hat 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 conten t 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  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the websi te along with the authors' 
responses. 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/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my name d report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal