Review for 10.1186/s12876-016-0443-2 (2016)

Reviewer’s report 
Title:  The prevalence of functional dyspepsia using Rome III questionnaire among chronic 
hepatitis C patients. 
 
Version:  0 Date:  05 Nov 2015 
 
Reviewer:  Francesca Galeazzi 
 
Reviewer's report: 
In this study the authors evaluated, in an Egyptian  population, the prevalence of functional 
dyspepsia - diagnosed according with Rome III crite ria - in patients with  chronic hepatitis C 
compared with healthy volunteers.  
The study addresses an interesting and significant topic, as presence of dyspepsia may impair 
clinical performance, nutrition, thus influencing c linical management of liver disease. However, 
some major issues need to be clarified:  
 
MAJOR COMMENTS 
1. According with table 1, the population studied a nd the control population are not 
comparable as claimed in the text: HCV patients app ear significantly older (significant 
difference), more often males (significant differen ce), more frequently smokers 
(significant difference) and with higher BMI (signi ficant difference) compared with 
control population.  
Thus the obtained finding may be due to age, overwe ight, smoking habit and should not be 
attributed to liver disease. A proper, matchable co ntrol group should be used 
2. Does the control group reflects the characterist ics of general population? 
3. Data showing stage of liver disease and comorbid ities should be provided, as liver size, 
comorbidities such as diabetes may influence presen ce of symptoms   
  
MINOR COMMENTS 
The manuscript should be revised for several typos and punctuation. 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described? 
If not, please specify what is required in your com ments 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. 
No 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by t he data shown? 
If not, please explain in your comments to the auth ors. 
No 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manusc ript 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 manu script: 
Needs some language corrections before being publis hed 
Declaration of competing interests 
Please complete a declaration of competing interest s, considering the following questions: 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbur sements, fees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose finan cially from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future? 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisat ion 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 an y 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 intere sts? 
6. Do you have any non-financial competing interest s 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 det ails below. 
I Declare that I have no competing interests below.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journ al. 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 o n the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made availab le 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 repo rt can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published. 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journ al