Review for 10.1186/s12876-017-0653-2 (2017)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Add-on neurological benefits of antiviral therapy in HCV patients with Chronic Kidney 
Disease —A Nationwide Cohort Study  
 
Version: 1 Date: 08 May 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Michel  Jadoul  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
The revised version is improved but 2 points of my previous review have not been addressed at 
all by the authors.  
 
"2.As in any observational study, the key question is the risk of residual con founding, or hidden 
factors that may account for the observed difference(s) but were not measured.  
 
Thus, the wording of the paper should be adapted to reflect the observational design:  avoid 
"impact "or reduce etc… Associations are described, not impacts" The conclusion of the paper 
starts with "Our study showed that standard IBT strongly prolonged survival and delayed dialysis 
for those HCV infected Patients with CKD" I could not disagree more (see above)  
 
"3.In that respect, the authors should address the  question of treatment bias, as this was not an 
RCT. In particular, can they comment on the impact of year of treatment with IBT? Was this 
adjusted for in this study? Sim ilarly, does the study database account for socio -economic status 
or education level, and/or rural versus urban setting? Intuitively, each of these factors might be 
associated with a modification of interest for good health -care, even though health care i s 
accessible in Taiwan. Please, clarify and comment"  
 
The authors do not reply regarding  the year of diagnosis, nor regarding the education level/socio -
eco status. It is not because health -care is reimbursed that all patients seek attention from the 
approriate physician. This is a MAJOR potential BIAS!  
 
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 nec essary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before be ing published  
 
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 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.  
 
no change from previous round of review  
 
I agree to th e 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