Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-01617-8 (2021)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
CT differentiation of gastric ectopic pancreas from gastric stromal tumors
Version: 
1 
Date: 
23 Aug 2020
Reviewer's report:
*General comments: Unfortunately, there is no "something-new" in this study. All results are predictable. 
I can easily find a lot of typo-errors and grammatical mistakes.
There are many repeated phrases within the paper, redundancy and irrelevant contents. 
*Specific comments:
- Please unify GIST and GST
- In the abbreviation section, there are two GEPs. 
- I think the term of "what's more" is informal. Please replace it with "additionally, in addition, moreover
or furthermore...etc."
- I recommend "peritumoral infiltration" rather than "blurred serosa or fat-line of peritumor". Later one is
unfamiliar to radiologists and frankly speaking, we hardly see "serosa" in CT. 
- What do DEAP and DEPP stand for? In my opinions, they seem to be "degree of enhancement on arterial
phase" and "degree of enhancement on portal phase". Please address in abbreviation section.
Currently, there are explanations how you get the values, instead of description of abbreviated terms. 
- Page3/Line50: stomach is the commonest 
--> the most common 
- Page3/Line60: Ectopic pancreas may commonly perform as --> present as
- Please add the definition of necrosis. You mention than one of GEP shows necrosis on CT. How did you
differentiate necrosis from ductal structure or fatty change in GEPs? 
- Page10/Linge199: pancreatic issue -> pancreatic tissue
- Discussion section should be shortened. Very redundant. 
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to Publons
(a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, please click on
the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted to Publons upon
publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt
of this review and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with
Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be able to
recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative
metadata for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such
information. For example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate
reviewers. Please find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
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)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use of appropriate controls),
and are the conclusions supported by the evidence presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
Yes
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
Yes
Is the presentation of the work clear?
Yes
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free from apparent
manipulation?
Yes