Review for 10.1186/s12876-019-1037-6 (2019)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Imbalanced Mucosal Microcirculation in the Remission Stage of Ulcerative Colitis using 
Probe -based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy  
 
Version: 0 Date: 28 Jan 2019  
 
Reviewer: Research Square  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
"STATISTICAL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT:  
 
Is the study design appropriate for the research question (considering whether the analyzed 
population accurately reflects the design and whether you see any problems with 
control/comparison groups, e.g., likely confounders)?  
No - there are minor issues  
 
Are methodologies adequate and well implemented (considering whether assumptions are 
addressed and whether analyses are robust)?  
No - there are major issues  
 
Are the analyses adequately communicated (considering whether reporting details are adequate 
and whether figures and tables are well labeled and described)?  
No - there are minor issues  
 
Does the interpretation accurately reflect the analyses without overstatement (considering 
whether limitations/bias are acknowledged and whether accurate descriptors, e.g., 'significant', 
are used?  
No - there are minor issues  
 
Could an appropriately REVISED version of this work represent a statisticall y sound 
contribution?  
Maybe - with major revisions  
 
STATISTICAL REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
I have reviewed article entitled ""Imbalanced Mucosal Microcirculation in the Remission Stage 
of Ulcerative Colitis by probe -based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy"" for stat istical point of 
view.  
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
I have the following concerns:  
 
There are 2 independent groups (7 person for each), 4 measurements, from 3 locations.  
 
Age and gender distribution seems to be similar. However, it would be better to compare and 
show if there is difference statistically. Median, minimum and maximum ages should be given. 
Since older age is important in the changes of ischemia and microcircul ation. They may be added 
to Table 1.  
 
In the statistical analysis it is not defined whether the measurements are normally distributed. 
This analysis is missing.  
Also, since the number of cases are low, it would be better if non -parametric tests were used. 
Median, minimum and maximum values should also be given.  
 
It is stated that UC unaffected segment, Mayo 0, Mayo 1 score segments with the control are 
compared. Therefore it would be necessary to use Kruskal -Wallis Test, following pair -wise 
comparison with Mann -Whitney U test using Bonferoni correction.  
 
The comparisons were made not patient wise but measurement wise. It would be better to show 
the measurements in a box -plot or preferably violin plot to see if there are outliers.  
The data in Table 4 can be  compared using Fisher's exact test.  
 
I would also recommend the analysis of correlation among MVD, DSD, FCDL and FCDA 
measurements.  
 
Pie charts are not informative. A combined bar chart, with percentages given would be more 
informative.  
 
Design: The cont rol group should be further described. Older people are likely to have more 
microcirculation problems. Presence of ischemic vascular diseases or diabetes should be 
described.  
Methodology: The statistical analysis should be made with non -parametric comparis ons.  
Reporting: Tables and graphs should be revised.  
Interpretation: Interpretation should be revised based on the new analysis.  
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
see comments above"  
 
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 t he 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 wr itten 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, 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 o f 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.  
 
This reviewer has been rec ruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
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 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