Review for 10.1186/s12876-018-0798-7 (2018)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: "Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross 
sectional study from Sri Lanka"  
 
Version: 2 Date: 18 Apr 2018  
 
Reviewer: David N. Lewin  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Please include all comments for the authors in this box rather than uploading your report as an 
attachment. Please only upload as attachments annotated versions of manuscripts, graphs, 
supporting mat erials or other aspects of your report which cannot be included in a text format.  
Please overwrite this text when adding your comments to the authors.  
Line 113: I think this should say that the criteria are imperfect (not perfect)  
Line 131: Extra t (perh aps should be the)  
I find it very hard to believe that no adenomatous polyps were identified. You state that 98 
patients had polyps detected and sampled, but none were diagnosed as adenomatous polyps. 
Admittedly this is a different population than the US (where I would expect a minimum of 50% 
should be adenomas), but this seems very unlikely.  
Considering that age is one of the EPAGE criteria for colon cancer screening, it is not surprising 
that age >50 would be more likely to be appropriate  
How can you h ave a p value of 0.000  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declara tion 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 pa tents 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 competin g 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 att achments I upload will be posted on the website 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 named 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