Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01240-z (2020)

Reviewer’ s report
Title: Predictors of advanced fibrosis in elderly patients with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic fatty
liver disease: The GOASIA study
Version: 0Date: 18 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Naoyuki Fujimori
Reviewer's report:
Pitisuttitihum et al. showed that elderly NAFLD patients have a higher prevalence of advanced
fibrosis than non-elderly. Although the result seemed reasonable, there are several issues to besolved. I think the following points will further improve the quality of your paper.1.It is alreadyknown that age is a factor related to liver fibrosis, so the conclusion of this paper is lacking inimpact.2.Introduction; The idea of not distinguishing between NASH and NAFL has also beenproposed.3.Line 113; Is it difficult to investigate factors related to liver fibrosis by comparingelderly and non-elderly?4.Participating centers and cases; The number of patients at each centershould be included to show that there is no bias.5.Line136-137; Have you excluded AIH, PBC,etc.?6.Statistical Analysis; Is nonparametric test appropriate for clinical data? Because it is notalways normal distribution.7.The performance of non-invasive fibrosis scores in elderly NAFLDpatients; In groups with limited ages, the performance of scores including age will deteriorate.
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.
Unable to assessAre the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
NoAre 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 furtherassessment in your comments to the editors.
I recommend additional statistical review
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
AcceptableDeclaration 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
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 reportincluding 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 CommonsCC-BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). I understand that any commentswhich I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential commentsto the editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal