JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-17 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Fecopneumothorax and colopleural fistula - uncommon complications of Crohn's disease Title: 
 3  17 April 2006 Version: Date: 
 Edward Loftus Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is an interesting case report. The authors have responded to most of my concerns. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
There are still numerous typographical and grammatical errors throughout the manuscript. 
Practically half of the sentences contain an error. The authors need to enlist the help of someone 
who is completely fluent in written English in order to make this readable. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
Figure 3 is not cited in the text. It should probably be cited in the middle paragraph of page 5. Also, 
please provide a figure legend for Fig 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I have received research support from: Procter and Gamble, Celltech, Techlab, Abbott. 
I have consulted for: Prometheus, UCB, Abbott, Elan.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-17 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Fecopneumothorax and colopleural fistula - uncommon complications of Crohn's disease Title: 
 3  19 April 2006 Version: Date: 
 mario pescatori Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The revised text looks better I think the paper may be accepted for publication 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore)
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-17 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Fecopneumothorax and colopleural fistula - uncommon complications of Crohn's disease Title: 
 3  21 April 2006 Version: Date: 
 lena sonja liebl Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is a well described interesting case, providing information of a rare complication of 
Crohn`s disease. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
The authors should extend their discussion with regard to the treatment of the fecopneumothorax. It seems 
to be possible that a thoracoscopic decortication would have been beneficial to the patient who is likely to develop pleural fibrosis after fecal pleuritis. The further course of the treatment at the institute of lung diseases and the follow up is mentioned in the discussion, but lacking in the case report. The authors 
should explain the reasons for the use of Barium instead of water soluble contrast agent in suspicion of a 
fistula, since this is known to be contraindicated. Furthermore it would be interesting to know if there had 
been an alternative to total Colectomy with Brooke Ileostomy. Whereas total Proctocolectomy is the standard procedure for ulcerative colitis this is not true for M. Crohn. What were the reasons for this 
decision? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author 
can be trusted to correct) 
Minor errors in language eg missing articles can be found. 
Legends to the figures are missing. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the major What next?: 
compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-18 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Colorectal cancer screening awareness among physicians in Greece Title: 
 2  11 May 2006 Version: Date: 
 Grazia Grazzini Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
I read the implementions made by the Authors in the Introduction and Discussion sections of their paper 
concerning the role of organized screening programmes and the availability of local endoscopic services. I think that the article is now suitable for the pubblication. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-18 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Colorectal cancer screening awareness among physicians in Greece Title: 
 2  16 May 2006 Version: Date: 
 Marion R Nadel Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
1. Define the abbreviation "CCS" the first time you use it. 
2. Page 8, next to last sentence: By "a high rate of non-responders is anyhow amenable in this kind of 
cross-sectional survey" do the authors mean that the high rate of non-responders is common in this kind of 
survey? 
3. Table 1: colonoscopies are not included in this table and the abbreviation can be removed from the 
footnote. 
4. Table 2: the footnote numbers are wrong. All footnote numbers throughout the text should be checked. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
1. the authors should consider adding that, in, addition to detecting early stage cancers, screening can 
detect pre-cancerous polyps which can be removed, thereby preventing cancer. 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-16 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Caerulein-Induced Acute Pancreatitis in Mice that Constitutively Overexpress Reg/PAP Genes Title: 
 1  6 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Madhav Bhatia Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
In this study Norkina et al. have investigated caerulein-induced acute pancreatitis in mice that 
constitutively overexpress Reg/PAP genes. This is an interesting manuscript on an important 
subject and the authors should be congratulated for trying to address this question. 
However, this manuscript will be further strengthened by histological evidence, especially 
histological scoring to substantiate the results that have been reported in the manuscript. 
 Accept after discretionary revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-16 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Caerulein-Induced Acute Pancreatitis in Mice that Constitutively Overexpress Reg/PAP Genes Title: 
 3  13 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 Madhav Bhatia Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
The authors have addressed the concerns that I raised in my review and I believe that the current 
version is suitable for publication in BMC Gastroenterology. 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-16 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Caerulein-Induced Acute Pancreatitis in Mice that Constitutively Overexpress Reg/PAP Genes Title: 
 3  13 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 Marc Chanson Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
I have read with attention the revised version of the above cited 
manuscript. The authors have made an important effort in revising their manuscript and all my comments were taken into account. I have no objections for this manuscript to be acdepted now fo publication in your 
journal. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-16 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Caerulein-Induced Acute Pancreatitis in Mice that Constitutively Overexpress Reg/PAP Genes Title: 
 3  4 April 2006 Version: Date: 
 Makoto Otsuki Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The responses of the authors to my comments are acceptable. The revised manuscript is 
adequqtely improved. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-15 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Hepatopulmonary syndrome in patients with chronic liver disease: role of pulse oximetry Title: 
 1  9 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 pilar taura Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
General comments 
The article submited by Delieber et al entitle "Hepatopulmonary Syndrome....role of pulse oximetry" is focussed on evaluating the use of pulse oximetry to identify patients with HPS. The authors concluded that this non-invasive test is a useful screening test for HPS which has an incidence of 
about 5%. 
- The diagnostic criteria for HPS have not been defined in "Methods". It is well known that there is enough evidence to clarify the diagnostic criteria for HPS. Recently, as a result of a Task Force, a group of experts in HPS defined the more adequate criteria (Eur J Resp Dis) 
- One of clearest criteria for HPS is the evidence, by means of echocardiography or lug perfusion 
scaning, of intrapulmonary vascular dilatation. In order to evaluate the utility of a test to diagnose an entity, you need to confirm or negate this entity by means the gold standard test. Consequently, it seems to be obvious that, in all patients echocardiography or lung perfusion scaning sould have 
been done. 
- Although the aim of the study is very interesting and, probably, pulse oximetry is a uselful scrining test for moderate-to-severe HPS, the incidence of mild or fustres forms could be underestimated. In Results: 
- There is some redundant and superfluous information in the first and second paragraph that are 
summarized in a table and can be omitted. - The information included in paragrapf 4 and 5 would be much clear if shown on a table - It is difficult to arrive to a conclusion that there is a good correlation between shunt volum and pO2 
or Sao when the statistical study was based on only four patients. Nevertheless it is indisputable 
that the results are statistically correct. Summary 
This study has been well done if the objective was to quickly identify in a simple manner severe HPS 
in patients with chronic liver disease or non-cirrhotic portal hypertension, however it not useful to 
identify "the incidence" of HPS. It could have suggested ways to identify mild or fustres forms (clinical data or functional respiratory study) in order to increase the diagnostic percentage. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interest
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-15 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Hepatopulmonary syndrome in patients with chronic liver disease: role of pulse oximetry Title: 
 3  29 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 pilar taura Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
I read with interest the reviewed manuscript and I agree with the changes done by the authors. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-15 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Hepatopulmonary syndrome in patients with chronic liver disease: role of pulse oximetry Title: 
 3  1 April 2006 Version: Date: 
 Michael J Krowka Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
What was the body position when arterial blodd gases were drawn in the HPS patients described in 
Table 2? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I hdeclare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-14 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Loss of interleukin-12 modifies the pro-inflammatory response but does not prevent duct Title: 
obstruction in experimental biliary atresia 
 1  21 February 2006 Version: Date: 
 Jiin-Haur Chuang Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
The authors describe in this article that loss of IL-12 does not prevent the development of 
experimental biliary atresia in newborn mice infected with rhesus rotavirus (RRV). They argue that the observed phenotype is caused by persistently high levels of neutrophil infiltration up to 2 weeks in the liver of IL-12-deficient mice and increased, though low, levels of IFN? mRNA. The article is 
organized in a very concise format. It is acceptable at its present form with high priority. Some minor 
comments may help to make the description clearer to the readers: 
1. In Figure 1 and 2, the number of mice in WT and IL-12KO group was N=15-21. However, from the 
Results section, we know that the survival of the animals is less than 10% beyond 3 weeks. We 
don’t know how many animals died in the disease process. Is N=15-21 equally present at each time 
point, or the number only represents the number of the animals enrolled in the study and the number 
varied at each time point. 
2. RRV infection in the IL-12KO group is associated with low levels of IFN? but high levels of IFNa. 
In a study by the authors’ group, it is interesting to note that the genetic knockout of interferon-? 
(IFN-?) in newborn Balb/c mice completely prevents the inflammatory and fibrotic obstruction of extrahepatic bile ducts after rotavirus infection. On the contrary, a single-dose therapy of IFN-a 
protects all rhesus rotavirus-infected pups from cholestatic diseases. In this study, a combined effect 
of lower IFN? and higher IFN-a in the IL-12KO group should theoretically protect the animal from 
RRV-induced biliary inflammation and obstruction. Is there presence of other mechanisms that 
counteract the effects of IFN-a or IFN?? What is the role of interferon regulatory factor (IRF) family in 
the disease process after RRV infection in the WT and IL-12KO groups? 
3. It is not clear what “amorphous tissue” means in the figure 4. 
In general, the materials contained in this article is appealing and interesting to the readers. I enjoy 
the privilege to review it. 
 Accept after discretionary revisions What next?: 
 An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-14 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Loss of interleukin-12 modifies the pro-inflammatory response but does not prevent duct Title: 
obstruction in experimental biliary atresia 
 2  29 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 Claus Petersen Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Author´s replay and the revision of the manuscript are appropriate. Therefore, publication of the 
paper has to be recommanded. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-13 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 2  9 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 STUART FORBES Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is a well performed study looking at the generation of cells with a cholangiocyte phenotype. It is 
of interest to those studying biliary epithelial biology and may indicate a future technique of broad 
applicability. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) We should see a photomicrograph of the typical lesions that develop in the model at the timepoints 
mentioned. 
We need to see controls for the immunofuorescent immunocharacterisation (ie no antibody negative control and a positive control) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Im not sure why in the discussion the authors think that expression of CK 18 and 19 rules out an undifferentiated of oval cell phenotype. 
Have monoclonal cell cultures been produced (from a single cell)? 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-13 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 2  20 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Eugenio Gaudio Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
1. The authors should improve the description of optical microscopic methods. 
2. Did the Authors use a method to block unspecific binding of the antibodie in the 
immunofluorescence stainings? and a method to permeabilize the cells (for protein expressed 
intracellularly)? 
3. In the immunofluorescence methods, the authors should indicate the description of primary and 
secondary antibodies (species reactivity, sources and, if possible, the company that provided the 
primary antibody), the dilution used and the time of incubation with the secondary antibodies. 
4. Figure 3A: the H&E staining should be changed with a better section (the nuclei are not well 
displayed) or/and with a section with a Masson’s trichrome stain. 
5. In the discussion the authors do not explain why they have been not able to isolate cholangiocytes 
from dissociated chronic phase granulomas or dissociated liver fragments. This aspect should be 
better elucidated in the discussion. 
6. In the discussion some sentences are not supported by references. 
7. The cell line should be tested for epithelial markers (CK-19 at least) at least after 16 passages 
and at one year and eight months of culture 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
1. Legend figure 3, line13: microvilli instead of villi. 
2. Legend figure 5, line 2: the label “B.” misses. 
3. Figure 1. The chronic phase is described as 45 days after the infection instead of 90 days. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-13 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 3  17 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 Eugenio Gaudio Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
the revised paper is now, in my opinion, suitable for publication on BMC 
Gastroenterology. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-13 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 3  21 March 2006 Version: Date: 
 STUART FORBES Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
Nil required 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
Nil required 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) Nil required 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-11 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Inhibition of the oxytocin receptors delays gastric emptying Title: 
 1  7 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Henry P Parkman Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This study looks at the effect of oxytocin on gastric emptying by studying the effect of oxytocin and 
an oxytocin antagonsit. 
Major Compulsory Revisions 
1. The ultrasonography methodology is confusing. It is not clear that the decrease in antral size 
represents a slowing of gastric emptying. I suggest plotting serial antral size over time similar to what 
was done with the satiety scores. 
2. The manuscript could be improved by reporting the changes in oxytocin levels with meals in this 
particular manuscript, rather than referring to unpublished observations. 
Minor Essential Revisions 
3. Measurement of oxytocin levels would be helpful. Were the oxytocin levels elevated during the 
infusion compared to saline? 
4. The specificity of the antagonist is unclear. 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-11 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Inhibition of the oxytocin receptors delays gastric emptying Title: 
 3  3 February 2006 Version: Date: 
 Ad A Masclee Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors have responded in detail to the comments and questions. There remain concerns about 
the lack of data between 15 and 90 min.However, to obtain these data a new study has to be 
performed. I suggest to accept the paper,but 1) to include or refer to plasma oxy data of previous studies and 2) to specifically mention in the discussion that not the proces of gastric emptying but 
just gastric volume at two time points has been obtained. The individual data on GER are illustrative 
and show large variation. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after discretionary revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interest
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-11 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Inhibition of the oxytocin receptors delays gastric emptying Title: 
 3  19 February 2006 Version: Date: 
 Henry P Parkman Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
Revision read. Thanks for updating it. 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-10 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Acute partial Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in cytomegalovirus primary Title: 
infection: Case report 
 3  20 November 2005 Version: Date: 
 Ioannis Koutroubakis Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors report a case of Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in a patient with 
cytomegalovirus infection. This is a rare association and so far the association of Budd-Chiari 
syndrome and CMV infection has not been described in the literature. It is an interesting and well 
written paper.------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
The thrombophilic evaluation should be reported in more detail and the values of the examined 
parameters should be provided. 
For the exclusion of an early hepatocellular carcinoma the value of alpha fetoprotein should be 
provided.------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-10 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Acute partial Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in cytomegalovirus primary Title: 
infection: Case report 
 3  23 November 2005 Version: Date: 
 Jerome Dumortier Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
Spahr and coll. report the case of a young woman who presented the association of a portal and 
hepatic vein thrombosis during an acute cytomegalovirus primoinfection with probable liver involvement. The paper is interesting because of the rarity of such complication of CMV infection. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
I have some comments on the case. 
1/ Did the authors explore the other causes of liver diseases, especially auto-immunity in this young 
woman ? Did histological examination exclude a pre-existing liver disease ? 
2/ Was the patient treated with ganciclovir or other antiviral treatment ? If not, this point has to be 
discussed. 
3/ Did the authors detect DNA-CMV by PCR on the liver biopsy ? 
4/ The authors state that the patient was immunocompetent. What were the explorations made ? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-10 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Acute partial Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in cytomegalovirus primary Title: 
infection: Case report 
 3  27 November 2005 Version: Date: 
 Daniel Seehofer Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors present a well documented case report that suggest an association between CMV infection and portal plus hepatic vein thrombosis. All relevant clinical and work-up data are given. The association between CMV infection and vascular thrombosis at different localizations has been 
described in several case reports. Most of them have been found in women in the thirties taking oral 
contraceptives or having other risk factors for venous thromoses. However, the association between 
CMV and Budd Chiari syndorme in immunocompetent patients has not been described previously. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) none 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
none 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
It would be interesting to know, if this poatient has a history of smoking as further risk factor. 
 Accept after discretionary revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-10 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Acute partial Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in cytomegalovirus primary Title: 
infection: Case report 
 4  26 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 Ioannis Koutroubakis Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The manuscript is now significantly improved. All the points of the reviewers have been suscessfully 
covered. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-10 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Acute partial Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in cytomegalovirus primary Title: 
infection: Case report 
 4  26 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 Jerome Dumortier Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
Spahr and colleagues answered to my questions. I have no more comments. 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-9 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Epidemic infectious gastrointestinal illness aboard U.S. Navy ships deployed to the Middle Title: 
East during peacetime operations - 2000-2001. 
 1  21 October 2005 Version: Date: 
 Laura Jean J Podewils Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors have re-written the manuscript as a full article; it is much improved in terms of 
thoroughness and organization, and is an important contribution to the literature on the impact of 
norovirus in military populations. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-9 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Epidemic infectious gastrointestinal illness aboard U.S. Navy ships deployed to the Middle Title: 
East during peacetime operations - 2000-2001. 
 1  15 November 2005 Version: Date: 
 Ben Lopman Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This draft is a substantial improvement from the previous version I reviewed a few months earlier. 
However, I still have a few reservations that I think the author's may want to address. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
Abstract - The authors should be careful about referring to this paper as a cohort study. It certainly is 
not a traditional cohort, and if refereed to as a cohort, this should be fully explained as in the text. 
Introduction - As above 
Results - What is the sensitivity of the results (oubbreak incidence) to the threshold level? What is 1 
or 3 standard deviations were used rather than the 95% CI? 
What was the rate ratio comparing outbreak rates in the large:small ships? 
State which statistical test was using in the Poisson models: Likelihood ratio or Wald? 
End of para 2: Jan and May had the most number of outbreaks. What about outbreak rates? 
Discussion - Para 1. I dont think that the evidence is sufficient that the observed decrease in 
recorded outbreaks was due to a public health reponse. Outbreak control remains crude and of 
unproven effectivness. 
If I understand correctly, the methods used in this study meant that the duration of an outbreak 
would be at least 3 weeks - outbreak week(s) + run in week + run out week. The authors need to 
make this limitaion more clear and perhaps exclude the duration of outbreak from the main results 
(in the abstract) It is not enough to say that viral outbreaks are typically of longer duration - this just re-iterates the biases in most surveillance that smaller outbreaks are not captured and therefore 
gives us a skewed understanding of outbreak dynamics. My personal experience in a healthcare 
setting was that when a sensitive outbreak definition was used, many more small outbreaks of viral cause were detected. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-9 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Epidemic infectious gastrointestinal illness aboard U.S. Navy ships deployed to the Middle Title: 
East during peacetime operations - 2000-2001. 
 2  7 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Ben Lopman Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors have adequatley replied to all my concerns in the previous draft. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
I would suggest omitting the specific STATA commands and instead describe the statistical testing 
in the regression models. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-8 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Effects of a Cholesterol-Enriched Diet on Intestinal Smooth Muscle Contraction: Inhibition of Title: 
Muscarinic Receptors and their Disinhibition by the 5-HT4 Agonist - Tegaserod 
 1  11 November 2005 Version: Date: 
 David Q Wang Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
XXX ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-6-8 (2006)

Reviewer's report 
 Effects of a Cholesterol-Enriched Diet on Intestinal Smooth Muscle Contraction: Inhibition of Title: 
Muscarinic Receptors and their Disinhibition by the 5-HT4 Agonist - Tegaserod 
 3  12 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 David Schneider Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
All major compulsory and discretionary revisions have been satisfactorily addressed. There are a 
few Minor Essential Revisions still necessary before publication, but this reviewer finds the first 
revision acceptable for publication with minor edits. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
None. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
Regarding Minor Essential Revision 8: There remains a discrepancy in the number of animals 
reported to have been used. The authors have adequately explained why they have changed the 
total number of animals used from 96 to 64, and why 4 less animals were subsequently available for 
experimentation. The authors have changed the experimental design numbers per group from 19 to 
18. However, it seems that at least 72 animals must have been used given 4 experimental groups of 18. This must be clarified. 
Regarding Minor Essential Revision 23: The X-axis title in all figures should be “log[Carbachol](M)” 
and not “log[Carbachol].M” 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
None. 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests.