Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01511-9 (2020)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Linked Color Imaging Improves Visibility of Reflux Esophagitis
Version: 
2 
Date: 
27 Jul 2020
Reviewer's report:
This article is an interesting study, but its result section and discussion are
slightly poor, which should be revised. 
Major criticism 
#1. 
Color differences (
Δ
E) are higher in LCI than in WLI. 
It is important to
evaluate its components including 
Δ
a,
Δ
b and 
Δ
L. 
Values of 
Δ
E appear to be
associated with 
Δ
a between lesions and the surrounding mucosa. 
For example,
MCE LCI
Δ
a: 22.9-8.4=14.4, MCE WLI
Δ
a: 29.8-20.6=9.3. 
LCI
Δ
a is higher than
WLI
Δ
a. 
Please calculate 
Δ
a,
Δ
b and 
Δ
L, evaluate them from the point of these
color components and add them to Table 5.
Moreover, please discuss them in the discussion section. 
#2. 
Discussion is too long. 
The begging 8 lines of the discussion section are
result of this study and should be moved to the result section. 
Between 9 line and
29 line of the discussion section, the review of past articles was stated. The
review is not necessary in the discussion section. Please describe some of these
contents in association with the results in this study, if authors would like to
state them in the discussion section. 
#3. 
The discussion section includes many data themselves in the result. 
Most of
numerals should be deleted because same data should be described in the other
sections or tables. 
Minor Criticism
#1. 
This article should be checked by the English native writer. 
#2. 
In the line 13 of background in the main text, "By overlapping narrow band
laser light with white light laser" should be revised to " By overlapping narrow
band images by both 410nm and 450 nm with white light image produced by
450nm" 
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this
review directly to Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would
like to take advantage of this service, please click on the “Yes” option below.
Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted
to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons, you
will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be
able to recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the
Review Data to generate derivative metadata for the benefit of Publons and you
as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such information. For
example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help
editors to identify candidate reviewers. Please find the details of processing in
Publons’ privacy policy 
https://publons.com/about/terms
No
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.
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 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
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial
office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note
you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and
confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we
will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use
of appropriate controls), and are the conclusions supported by the evidence
presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
Yes
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
Yes
Is the presentation of the work clear?
Yes
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free
from apparent manipulation?
Yes