JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03533-z (2024)

Title: Impact of exercise on outcomes among Chinese patients with Crohn's disease: A mixed
methods study based on social media and the real world
Version: 1 Date: 14 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Peter S. Micalos
Reviewer's report:
Impact of exercise on outcomes among Chinese patients with Crohn's disease: A mixed methods
study based on social media and the real world
The authors have brought together an original research that combines an analysis of Social
media, Interviews, and Survey on physical activity/exercise in Crohn’s disease.
There are a range of issue to be addressed in this manuscript. Generally, the Discussion required
more connection between the findings of the present study and the scientific literature on CD.
Abstract
Line 73 , the P value could be presented as p<0.01
Line 77 , there is mention of Spiritual health in the conclusion however this was not mentioned
or described in the methods or results.
Introduction
Line 98 , says etc, however this requires some more description & citation.
Line 106 , PE , physical exercise (PE)
Line 118 , poorer , improve wording eg. ‘worse’
Line 135 – 145 this paragraph has content that belongs in Methods. Instead , this paragraph
needs to provide previous research on the use of social media in collating behavioural data .
Also this paragraph needs to state the aim of the study.
Methods
Line 150 , state the approval number for the ethics from the Ethics Review Board.
Fig 1 specify what the word ‘Bar’ is.
Line 164 , ‘we using’ improve wording
Line 175 , add citation for the Python toolkit
Results
Line 281 Fig 2 , the font is too small to read in the figure.
Line 281 Fig 2 , the clusters in the top right quadrant appear close together and so could explore
if they can be merged under a common title.
Line 286 , table 1, the cluster number shown in figure 1 needs to be assigned to the Representative
term cluster shown in table 1. Increase font size.
Line 286 , table 1, group the Representative term clusters together, as shown in Fig 2.
Line 301 , fig 3. The font is too small in the figure. Also the figure needs a line divider to separate
the Effects, and Factors. Bold the subtitles. The main title to include the description that this is
the outcome of the thematic analysis.
Line 338 , This paragraph needs more work. Add more detail on the SDM and the second
sentence requires more connection with the paragraph.
Line 352, condense induce, promote and hinder into 2 items and make this consistent throughout
manuscript.
Line 366 , briefly explain that travel refers to how much time spent on walking or bicycling etc.
Line 369 , It is unclear what the connection is with the shift work meta-analysis and the current
results.
Line 382 Limitations. This study has a large age range, Age 18-80, would aging influence the
results. Also note that the Correlations are mostly less than 0.5 which is less than moderate
association.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03533-z (2024)

Title: Impact of exercise on outcomes among Chinese patients with Crohn's disease: A mixed
methods study based on social media and the real world
Version: 2 Date: 29 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for taking my first round of comments, and those of the other peer-reviewers into
consideration. I believe the manuscript is of a much higher quality. I still have some minor
concerns outlined below.
Overall:
There exist minor grammatical and English errors throughout. These should be checked and
corrected before acceptance and publication. E.g.
Line 199 “…whose meanings could not be identified inf the word segmentation were removed
…”
Line 218 “…, selected through convenience and purposive sampling. were selected by
convenience and purpose sampling.”
Line 273 “. We rRetrieved participants' current…”
Line 279 “…was used in this study (https://www.who.int/zh).” # citation not consistent
Line 289 “…through 8 eight subcategories.”
Lay Summary and Key Messages:
IBD is used in place of Chron’s, why? This study is not inclusive of ulcerative colitis, thus IBD
is not the most accurate term for presentation of findings. I think IBD should be changed to
Chron’s in this section
Methods:
Line 172 cross-sectional should be reported against STROBE guidelines
Line 306 Data analysis. I suggest this information would be better presented as three separate
paragraphs directly following the methods of your three different approaches. Or, it needs to
be stepped out in more detail, and in the order of your three approaches. The majority of the
paragraph is toward quantitative analysis or phase 2 and the last two sentences for each part of
phase 1. This split seems disproportional.
Discussion:
Line 435 again you use IBD, but your study deals with CD, so I suggest just sticking to CD.
Line 465 “Our results are consistent with this, therefore, it is recommended to exercise at known
restroom locations, such as home workouts or some form of indoor exercise, such as a gym,
which may be a priority consideration.” # a bit clunky, I suggest rewording, possibly “Our
results are consistent with these findings, therefore we recommend consideration is put towards
exercising at locations where individuals with CD are comfortable with the location and use of
restrooms, for example home workouts or a familiar gym.”
Line 489 “…that individuals with IBD were twice as likely to be out of the labour force as
were controls[67].” Being out of the labour force is not linked to sedentary behaviour, I am
unclear on the connection in this sentence. Are you insinuating that increased PA will reduce
poor mental health and thus keep individuals in the workforce? This is a bit of a reach from your
findings alone. This paragraph needs clarity and consideration to not overstate findings from
cross-sectional data.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03533-z (2024)

Title: Impact of exercise on outcomes among Chinese patients with Crohn's disease: A mixed
methods study based on social media and the real world
Version: 2 Date: 05 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Peter S. Micalos
Reviewer's report:
The researchers have made a substantial revision of the manuscript based on reviewer feedback.
Please find additional responses as highlighted in the  file attached.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03525-z (2024)

Title: Novel non-HDLc/HDLc Ratio for Predicting MASLD: A Cross-Sectional Study in a
Chinese Health Screening Population
Version: 2 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
MAFLD should better used Minimal adaption is needed to accomplish the change Definition
should be provided in the introduction Dyslipidemia is part of the metabic syndrome Authors
should refer to possibility of patients with dyslipidemia  ( pathological cholesterol, HDL, TG)
to be connected with MAFLD They should also report possible role of non-HDL cholesterol in
the pathogenesis of MASLD/MASH Methods Number of excluded cases belong to the results
Drug induced liver injury needs rechalenge Authors should define if they exclude cases with
verified vases of toxic liver injury or even possible cases Chronic lever diseases should be
reported in detail. Patients ith MAFLD and MeLD should be reported separately if possible
Commorbidities precludeing exclusion from the study population should be described in detail
(CKD, Hematological disorders) Was any patient with heart disease excluded? Results Actually
authors defined as NAFLD exessive presence of fat in the liver Calculations should be redone
for MASLD Thats fatty liver +metabolic syndrome
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03525-z (2024)

Title: Novel non-HDLc/HDLc Ratio for Predicting MASLD: A Cross-Sectional Study in a
Chinese Health Screening Population
Version: 3 Date: 27 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Amira A A Othman
Reviewer's report:
I want to extend my congratulations to all those involved in this work. All the required
amendments have already been made carefully and satisfactorily. I hope that the research will
be presented to science.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03525-z (2024)

Title: Novel non-HDLc/HDLc Ratio for Predicting MASLD: A Cross-Sectional Study in a
Chinese Health Screening Population
Version: 3 Date: 27 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Abstract The sentenced about the aim of the study is unfinished the eatio of nonHDL/HDL
cholesterol is related to what? It is not clear which parameters entered in multivariated analysis
In the results numerical values for statistically significant paremeters should be presented Finally
the size of the abstract could be reduced making it more dense Is the aim of the study to
define criteria of MASLD in the general population? Actually this is an interesting prespective,
because today ascreening for MASLD in the general population is thought not to be cost
effective Methods Excluded patients should be moved to the results section Once more MASLD
patients should be devided in MASLD and MetSLD patients taking into comsideration alcohol
consumption unless nonHDLc/HDLc ratio is uselesss to discriminate the two groups Statistics
Calculation of the sample size should be performed Construction of MASLD prediction models
should be described
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03525-z (2024)

Title: Novel non-HDLc/HDLc Ratio for Predicting MASLD: A Cross-Sectional Study in a
Chinese Health Screening Population
Version: 5 Date: 05 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
I think authors have made all changes requested Thus the document is ready for publication
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 3 Date: 10 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Alassan Kouamé Mahassadi
Reviewer's report:
the manuscript lacks novelty and has some errors in defining the inactive carriers of chronic
hepatitis B infection.
Any  gap in knowledge provided by the authors in the African context that could support the
relevance of their study
with the baseline characteristics, some patients could not be classified as inactive carriers which
jeopardized the definition.
Authors have to use the new definition of the inactive or asymptomatic carrier of chronic
hepatitis B instead of the old one which is abandoned
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 3 Date: 11 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Pantong Davwar
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript requires  some editing and corrections to ensure it is consistent  and also meets
its objectives based on the design of the study.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 3 Date: 20 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Sylvester Chuks Nwokediuko
Reviewer's report:
COMMENTS
Title :
It is clearly stated here that the study site is a hospital in South West Nigeria. However, it is also
stated under methods that the patients were recruited from the health institutions of the authors
of this study. The authors come from at least 3 continents with different HBV endemicities and
epidemiological patterns.
Study Rationale:
This is well stated. However the section on Background has a lot of information that should have
been reserved for discussion. The Background (Introduction) should be concise. It should start
with a statement of the gap in knowledge and how the study would try to bridge the gap.
Methodology
1. It is not clear where and how the patients for this study were recruited. If all the authors
contributed patients from their institutions, it should be clearly stated and reflected in the title.
Furthermore, it is not clear if an ethical approval obtained from one of the centers could be
applied to centers in other jurisdictions. This is important because the study involved an invasive
procedure on the participants.
2. Under Background/Introduction it is stated that patients who are less than 30 years with CHB
sometimes develop liver cancer in sub-Saharan Africa. Ideally the study should have either
concentrated on such patients or subjected them to a subgroup analysis.
3. Co-infection with HCV and HIH were considered and excluded. Why was co-infection with
HDV not considered, being a potential confounder in the observed histological changes?
4. How many pathologists were involved in reading the slides?
Results
Clearly stated, however the details of the HBV DNA (Viral load) of the participants were not
included. Was the viral load done in the same laboratory for all the participants?
Discussion
This needs to be improved. This is the section where most of the cited studies under Background
should be featured.
References
This section did not follow any pattern. In some cases, 3 authors are listed, followed by et al
while in others you have 4 or 5 authors listed before et al. Any chosen style of referencing must
be consistently used throughout the manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
This was an interesting study that sought to evaluate the histologic findings of patients under 30
years old with inactive chronic hepatitis B.
There were some important methodologic limitations in the study:
1. How did you ascertain that the selected patients indeed had inactive chronic hepatitis B?  Liver
enzymes and DNA levels fluctuate and a single ALT level and HBV DNA level is insufficient
to assign a phase of infection. Longitudinal follow up of these markers +/- histology is needed
to ascertain the phase of infection. In your inclusion criteria, you did not specify how long
and frequently the patients were followed up before being assigned as having inactive chronic
hepatitis B.
2. You have indicated that all patients in the study had normal ALT levels but did not define
what you considered normal. The upper limit of normal are lower than the lab defined ranges
and are 35 for males and 25 for females as per the AASLD. Did you use these ranges or the
laboratory defined ranges which you seemed to have used in table 2 for AST?
3. Nigeria has a high prevalence of chronic hepatitis D/ hepatitis B infection. Patients with
chronic HBV/HDV infection generally have low HBV DNA levels and are frequently HBeAg
negative  and hepatitis B e antibody (anti-Hbe) positive. This is the exact population you
were analyzing. Did you check for presence of anti-HDV antibody in these population? The
presence of concomitant HDV infection would be the driver of inflammation and fibrosis seen
on histology,
4. You calculated the sample size based on the prevalence of HBsAg in the town where the study
was conducted. I do not see how the prevalence of HBsAg factors into sample size calculation
in this study where you are looking at the presence of inflammation and fibrosis in patients with
inactive chronic hepatitis B.
Conclusions:
A lot of the conclusions are not appropriate and relevant to the study.
You cannot conclude that the ability to recruit 88 patients under 30 years makes early acquisition
common  in your region. This is not what the study was geared towards and should be removed
from the manuscript.
Patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B phase have variable amounts of fibrosis depending
on how long they spent in the immune active phase. This is a well known phenomenon. What
is more important is the finding of necroinflammation in these patients as this would not be
expected given the low ALT levels (which is another limitation as what was considered low
was not defined). Your discussion should have centered around why there could be ongoing
necroinflammation in these patients. I have highlighted some possible causes including in my
earlier points including inappropriate participant selection (point 1) and patients with chronic
HBV/HDV coinfection (point 3).
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 3 Date: 22 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Amoako Duah
Reviewer's report:
This study seeks to determine the histology patient of young Nigerians with inactive HBV
infection not considered for treatment with current treatment guidelines available. The
manuscript is well written.
I would like the authors to consider these recommendations to enrich their manuscript, so that
it would be more impactful
• The authors should include average viral load of the participate and determines its correlation
with the histopathology findings.
• The authors should also consider the recently released WHO treatment guidelines and
determine how many of their patients would have been considered for treatment and would
not be described as having inactive HBV infection. And whether the new treatment guidelines
addressed those who will benefit from treatment but not being considered
• The authors should avoid using hepatitis B carriers. Active and inactive HBV infection should
be fine
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 23 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study offers valuable insights into the histological assessment of liver disease in young
patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly in Nigeria.
The research addresses a critical gap in understanding liver disease progression in this
demographic that existing guidelines have often overlooked.
The study is well-designed, but relying on a single ALT measurement may not fully capture
the dynamic nature of liver inflammation in CHB patients. Serial measurements could provide
a more comprehensive assessment.
The findings from this study suggest that significant liver disease can occur in young patients
with CHB, even when ALT levels and HBV DNA are low. This has important implications
for clinical practice, particularly in regions with high HBV prevalence. The study highlights
the need to reconsider current guidelines and suggests that liver biopsy may be warranted in a
broader range of patients than recommended.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 27 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Abstract - should be standalone, I find that it is not adequately descriptive of the work.
Results have been overreported considering the objectives outlined for the study.
Discussion/conclusion section -  apply cautious interpretation of the results considering the
objectives
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 30 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Alassan Kouamé Mahassadi
Reviewer's report:
Patients included in your manuscript do not meet the definition criteria of "Inactive carrier"
Surrogate markers (APRI and FIB4)  have been used in the manuscript without any rational
background
Tree logistic regression models were used and could be combined to assess factors associated
with the outcome
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 31 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Amoako Duah
Reviewer's report:
This study highlights the needs to find appropriate level of viral load to start treatment especially
for Africa patients with viral hepatitis B.
The authors have responded to my previous queries and answers giving and incorporated in the
manuscript.
The authors should read through the manuscript to correct all the grammatical errors so that the
readers will understand.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 02 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript on liver histology patterns in young Nigerian patients with inactive
chronic hepatitis B virus infection has commendable improvements. The authors have clearly put
significant effort into addressing reviewer comments.  The discussion of non-invasive markers
and their limitations has been well-handled, providing valuable context for the study's findings.
I have few additional comments on the revised version.
- I appreciated  inclusion of a discussion about the degree of unexplained hyperbilirubinemia ,
although I found the explanation provided  not fully convincing. The cross-sectional nature of the
study might have affected this observation, limiting the ability to draw definitive conclusions.
- The utility of the pie chart is questionable, as it doesn't appear to convey key information more
effectively than alternative visualizations. Consider replacing it with a more informative graphic
or dropping it all-together
- Some tables appear busy, especially with the inclusion of different reference values for
laboratory tests. Consider simplifying by moving detailed reference values to footnotes or a
separate appendix.
- For tables with separate columns for raw frequencies and percentages, combine these into a
single column, presenting data as "n (%)". Authors could utilize an approach of comparative
analysis for most tables to add more insight into the study participants.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 5 Date: 29 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
- Patient selection: the criteria for defining inactive carriage do not seem to be met in all patients.
- For patients, particularly with fibrosis, elastometry could play an important role. It could help
avoid biopsy
- How do you explain that several patients have hypoalbuminemia? and an increase in ALP?
- Can you better define the different stages in those who have fibrosis or significant
inflammation?
- Interesting study showing that populations in Africa with HBV have a particular profile, and
that they must be taken on a case-by-case basis
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 5 Date: 02 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Abstract:
"Thirty-nine (44.3%) had significant necroinflammation and fibrosis on histology, 19 (21.6%)
of whom had necroinflammation only and 13(14.8%) had combined necroinflammation and
fibrosis."
This should read "Thirty-nine (44.3%) had significant necroinflammation and/or fibrosis...."
Background:
Please put a NUMERICAL value for ALT ULN for males and females as per SOGHIN.
Results:
"Sixty three(92.6%) patients who had APRI score of < 0.5 and FIB 4 score of < 1.45 were
found to have corresponding no to mild fibrosis on histology. Three participants with FIB 4
score of > 1.45 had evidence of significant fibrosis on histology however, seventeen (85%)
participants with no fibrosis or mild fibrosis using both the APRI and FIB 4 score were found
to have significant fibrosis on histology. "
Indicate what the denominator is. Eg 63/68 etc
The rest of article:
Please do a thorough review for language and grammar.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03501-7 (2024)

Title: Liver histology pattern of young patients with inactive chronic hepatitis B virus infection
from a Hospital in South West Nigeria
Version: 6 Date: 24 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
The authors' responses have adequately addressed the raised concerns, and I recommend that
the manuscript be approved for publication.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03530-2 (2024)

Title: A novel disulfidptosis-related LncRNA prognostic risk model: predicts the prognosis,
tumor microenvironment and drug sensitivity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Version: 1 Date: 01 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study established a DRG-lncRNA prognostic model that can be used to predict the
prognosis, tumor mutation burden, immune cell infiltration, and drug sensitivity of ECSS
patients. The results of this study provide valuable insights into the understanding of ESCC
and provide valuable assistance for the individualized treatment of ESCC patients. However,
some limitations impair the overall quality. I consider the article publishable with appropriate
revisions.
1. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for cases in TCGA need to be clarified.
2. The authors derived the lncRNAs only by bioinformatic correlation analysis, whether there
is a relationship between them and disulfidptosis needs to be supported by the literature.
3. The authors should appropriately analyze and discuss previous studies on lncRNAs as tumor
biomarkers, especially those based on similar bioinformatics methods (eg.PMID:38681588;
PMID:38371527). This will provide valuable context and enhance the relevance of their
findings.
4. The expression level of LncRNA in vivo is usually low. Did the researchers compare the
basic expression level in the initial screening process? Because if the expression is too low, a
slight increase will show a very high variance change and a low p-value. This extremely low
expression is not of great significance for diagnosis and treatment.
5. There is also a spelling error in the word "sensitivity" in Figures 10.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03530-2 (2024)

Title: A novel disulfidptosis-related LncRNA prognostic risk model: predicts the prognosis,
tumor microenvironment and drug sensitivity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Version: 1 Date: 08 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Abstract Was TMB correlations to LncRNA data evaluated or it was related with relevant
genes? In the results genes identified and nomogram  constructed should be described instead
of repeating methods If numerical values are available should be described Moreover more
significant data related to immune microenvironment, immune infiltration, immune function,
immune checkpoints, and drug sensitivity  should be described Methods Number of patients
belongs in the results as well as patients' characteristics Quantitative or qualitative evaluation
permitting comparisons in IHC should be performed Statistics All methods used is better to be
gathered in a relevant section Results Any statistically significant results should be presented in
the text Quantitative correlations of immunocyte parameters and OS should be presented in the
text Introduction of relevant pictures would be welcomed in the text
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03530-2 (2024)

Title: A novel disulfidptosis-related LncRNA prognostic risk model: predicts the prognosis,
tumor microenvironment and drug sensitivity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Version: 2 Date: 14 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Methods Number of patients in the study belong in the results Otherwise the document could
be accepted for publication after this change
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03530-2 (2024)

Title: A novel disulfidptosis-related LncRNA prognostic risk model: predicts the prognosis,
tumor microenvironment and drug sensitivity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Version: 2 Date: 15 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
The author's revisions essentially address the earlier problem and are recommended to be
accepted.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03507-1 (2024)

Title: An evidence-based nursing practice affects stress state, coagulation and complications in
patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
Version: 2 Date: 30 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
While the manuscript is potentially of interest to readers, there are several aspects that need
attention.
Title:
Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the title.
Add quality of life in the title.
Abstract:
In the method section, add the type of study and type of randomisation.
Report actual P values.
Introduction:
What was the gap, problem or reason for conducting research?
Methods:
In the method section, add the type of study.
Add the following sentences to the results section.
“In the experimental groups, there were 31 man and 29 women, the minimum age was 35 years
old, the maximum age was 71 years old, and the mean age of them was 53.00±18.50 years old;
moreover, the average onset time was 11.00±8.00 h ranged from 2 to 20 h. Furthermore, the
experimental groups consisted of 15 cases with hematemesis, 26 cases with black stool, and
19 cases with hematemesis with black stool. In the reference groups, 25 man and 35 women
were included. Patients in the reference groups were 36-72 years old, with an average age of
54.00±19.00 years old. Moreover, the mean onset time of patients in reference groups was
12.00±9.00 h ranging from 3 to 21 h. In addition, 12 cases with hematemesis, 30 cases with black
stool, 18 cases with hematemesis with black stool were involved in the reference groups. There
was no significant difference in age, gender, and disease symptoms between the two groups (P
> 0.05).”
No explanation has been provided regarding the details of randomization.
Please provide some references to the intervention section regarding your intervention.
Has the educational content been approved by the relevant experts?
Were the patients' values and preferences considered in the intervention group?
How long after the intervention were the tests taken?
Explain the validity and reliability of the data collection tools.
Instead of writing “other complications”, mention all the complications under consideration.
Detailed statistical analysis methods needs to be added to methods.
Results:
Add a table showing baseline demographic and clinical characteristics for each group.
It is necessary to add both Intra-group and inter-group comparison of the means of the variables.
Discussion:
Delete the first paragraph of the discussion section.
It is better to organize the key elements of discussion section into distinct paragraphs. The first
paragraph should baldly state the key findings of your research. The middle portion should
consist of the body of the discussion. This section interprets the important results, explains how
your results is similar to or different from those that have been published previously. The final
paragraph should include a ‘take home message’ and point to future directions for investigation
that have resulted from this study.
The weaknesses and strengths of the study should be written in the discussion section.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03507-1 (2024)

Title: An evidence-based nursing practice affects stress state, coagulation and complications in
patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
Version: 3 Date: 10 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear editor and authors,
The authors of the manuscript entitled  "An evidence-based nursing practice affects stress state,
coagulation, complications and quality of life in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
in the emergency department: A retrospective observational study"  highlighted all the changes
that I suggested to them as a reviewer. I would like to thank the authors for the changes and
inform the editor that I agree on the publication the aforementioned article.
All the best.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03507-1 (2024)

Title: An evidence-based nursing practice affects stress state, coagulation and complications in
patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
Version: 3 Date: 24 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your thorough review and the authors' diligent implementation of the suggested
revisions. I have only few comments to address.
What was the reason for using the retrospective observational study? It appears to be an
interventional study rather than a retrospective one.
The design format of Tables 1 is not suitable.
Add Conclusions section.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03507-1 (2024)

Title: An evidence-based nursing practice affects stress state, coagulation and complications in
patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
Version: 4 Date: 09 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for detailing and explaining the suggested changes. The manuscript now includes all
the necessary elements for publication.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 03 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Kengo Kasuga
Reviewer's report:
The authors have investigated the risk factors for complications associated with esophageal
foreign body removal. It is important to perform a preliminary clinical risk assessment of
complications.
I think some descriptions were questionable. Below is my specific critics.
1. In Materials and Methods, the definitions of holiday and COVID19 epidemic period should
be included. In addition, any specific changes in clinical behavior or changes in hospital rules
during the COVID19 and non-COVID19 periods should be explained.
2. In Supplementary Table 1, the authors state that foreign bodies are often the sharp bones of
fish and birds. Fish bones are known to cause gastrointestinal perforation, often in the small
intestine or bile duct, even after passing through the esophagus. If pushing a foreign body into the
stomach is considered a technical success, there should be an investigation into the probability
of this and whether the patient was successfully discharged.
3. I am doing multivariate analysis with mucosal injury, mucosal bleeding, and mucosal
perforation, however, I consider perforation and technical failure to be the clinically important
factors. It would be more useful information if risk factors for technical failure were also
examined.
4. The authors report that perforation occurred in 6.9% of cases. If the risk of complications is
to be discussed, it is necessary to separate cases in which the endoscopic procedure caused the
perforation from those in which the perforation was known to have occurred on prior CT scan.
5. Endoscopic findings are a subjective factor and there is a problem of interexamination
agreement. The author needs to elaborate on what methods were used to retrospectively examine
the patient. (i.e., was the physician reviewing the images an endoscopist, was it one doctor, was
it multiple doctors, did they have extensive endoscopic experience, etc.)
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 13 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
I congratulate the authors for this wonderful study. However, I will make contributions and
criticisms on some points.
1) In line 243, I observe that 21.7% of the patients applied after 24 hours of the complaint.
You stated that the reasons for late application were that they applied to another center first and
observed themselves at home. How many of the patients applied late because they observed
themselves at home? Did they make any attempts to remove the foreign body at home during
the period they observed themselves (trying to remove the foreign body by vomiting)?I think
that such a situation may increase the risk of developing complications.
2) How were the cognitive functions and cooperation of the patients? Did you have any mentally
retarded patients? Among the reasons for late presentation, could the foreign body in the
esophagus have been recognized late because the patients did not take care of their own self-
care? In fact, mental retardation and/or poor cognitive function of the patient may be a risk factor
for complications independent of the foreign body. And if you have such patients, I think that it
would enrich your article if you include this in the discussion section. I think this publication,
which was recently published this year, may contribute to you.
(Topaloglu O, K#l#c KN, Karapolat S, Ayd#n Y, Turkyilmaz A, Taslak Sengul A, Eroglu A,
Basoglu A. Diagnosis, treatment, and management of esophageal foreign bodies in patients with
mental retardation: A retrospective study from three centers. Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi
Derg. 2024 Apr 30;32(2):179-184. doi: 10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2024.25724. PMID: 38933315;
PMCID: PMC11197419.)
3) When I evaluated Table 2, I did not see the Department of Thoracic Surgery. Have you had
any foreign body experience with rigid esophagoscopy? Have you referred any cases to the
Thoracic Surgery department for primary repair of esophageal perforations? If yes, I would like
you to share the numbers if possible.
4)  In Table 2, in the Seniority of physician section, are the numbers you give for seniority
the number of complications developed? Or are they the number of cases performed? If it is
only the number of cases, it would be useful to include the number of complications. Could the
junior endoscopist be the reason for the high number of complications during early nights, late
nights and vacation times? If possible, it would be more effective and explanatory to indicate
the seniority of physician during these periods.
Best regards
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 18 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
In the background section, the authors should elaborate on the data to support why this study is
important, apart from the lack of research in this field.
The cause-effect relationship between non-foreign body factors and the risk of mucosal
injury, perforation, and mucosal bleeding should be rationally explained and supported by the
references. For instance, in lines 247-249, the specific references did not support the statement,
and appropriate references did not support the other statement in lines 253-255.
The authors could refer to the following article:
Kadriyan H, Primayanti I, Syamsidar S et al. Case Report: Modified endoscopic hook
for extracting magnetic esophageal foreign bodies in a rural area (https://doi.org/10.12688/
f1000research.129564.3)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4166/kjg.2018.72.1.1
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 2 Date: 08 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for addressing the feedback and reviewing the manuscript. The revised version
now provides a more comprehensive overview, emphasising both the clinical significance of
your work and the broader implications for future research.  Congratulations on successfully
completing the revision.
Best Regards
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 2 Date: 08 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Kengo Kasuga
Reviewer's report:
We think the authors were courteous in their response to our comments. Only the following
minor questions remain.
-We consider perforation and technical failure to be clinically important factors. It would be
more informative if risk factors for technical failure were also considered. The authors responded
that no information on technical failure was collected, but they did note that the treatment success
rate for esophageal foreign bodies was 97.8%. Analysis of risk factors for esophageal foreign
body treatment failure would be informative (e.g., treatment time, type of foreign body, size of
foreign body).
-If the authors did not include mentally retarded patients in their study or if the information was
not collected, it would be difficult to discuss. Maybe it is a limitation?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03532-0 (2024)

Title: Non-Foreign Body-Associated Risk Factors for Complications Associated with
Esophageal Foreign-Body Removal and Timing of Endoscopic Treatment: A Single-Center
Retrospective Study
Version: 3 Date: 14 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Kengo Kasuga
Reviewer's report:
We think the authors were courteous in their response to our comments.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03521-3 (2024)

Title: Terminal ileal intubation is not necessary in routine colonoscopy: data from a large-scale
retrospective study
Version: 2 Date: 17 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study showed that the terminal ileum intubation had low significance for the diagnosis
of ileal lesion and detection of colonic lesion. Although the results of the former were well
written and discussed, those of the latter seems not enough for emphasizing the low value of
terminal ileum intubation due to lack of important information regarding patient backgrounds
and endoscopy details. Please see the following comments.
Major comments:
1. The authors enrolled all patients who underwent colonoscopy during study period (unselected
patients). If so, the authors should describe the information regarding the purpose of examination
clearly (screening or surveillance, symptomatic or asymptomatic, etc.) because the indicators
such as adenoma detection rate vary depending on them. In addition, it would be better to add
those information as coefficients for propensity score matching.
2. Although the quality of bowel cleansing was evaluated by Boston Bowel Preparation
Scale (BBPS) in this study, there were no definition described about adequate or inadequate
preparation. In addition, in which areas were those determined? If they are scored, it would be
better to add them as a coefficient for propensity score matching.
3. The authors should clearly describe the definition of “right-sided colon.” Although there were
no significant differences between TII and no TII groups in the lesion detection rate in the right-
sided colon, how about that in the ascending colon or cecum?
Minor comments:
1. The authors should describe the definition of ADR with appropriate citation.
2. Tables should be numbered in the order they appear in the text.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03521-3 (2024)

Title: Terminal ileal intubation is not necessary in routine colonoscopy: data from a large-scale
retrospective study
Version: 2 Date: 30 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank editors  for giving me the opportunity to review "Terminal ileal intubation
(TII) is not recommended in routine colonoscopy: data from a large-scale retrospective study".
TII was not proposed in routine colonoscopy, owing to the limited diagnostic value and lack of
superiority on lesion detection.
There are some comments to confirm.
Conversely, this research has shown that TII does not decrease the polyp diagnosis rate (polyp
detection rate (PDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR), sessile serrated lesion detection rate
(SSDR)).
As the title suggests, TI observation is not recommended in routine colonoscopy, but if it can
reach the cecum and easily observe the TI, it is a good routine to observe TI. Of course, but I
do not think it is necessary to observe the TI all the time.
Although the withdrawal time was not measured in this study, it is difficult to understand the
disadvantages of observing TI part. I think the message that TII is not recommended is an
exaggeration.
The detection rate of TI lesions at this facility seems to be very lower than the standard in the
world.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03521-3 (2024)

Title: Terminal ileal intubation is not necessary in routine colonoscopy: data from a large-scale
retrospective study
Version: 3 Date: 23 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
You responded to the reviewer's comments in detail, and I understood them well. You have
made the necessary corrections to my comments, and I have no further comments.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03503-5 (2024)

Title: Clinical application of capsule sponge testing in symptomatic reflux disease: a national
prospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 28 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
The authors are to be applauded for taking on this study and evaluating the impact of a population
based cytosponge evaluation in reflux patients. There were no gross concerns with overall study
design and methodology.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03503-5 (2024)

Title: Clinical application of capsule sponge testing in symptomatic reflux disease: a national
prospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 22 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Sarah K. Thompson
Reviewer's report:
The authors present a retrospective cohort study evaluating the clinical utility of capsule sponge
testing in patients with reflux. I would like to commend the authors on an excellent study. Of
course, I have some questions and concerns but this is a great effort and a valuable addition to
the current literature on the topic.
1. Why is pregnancy a contraindication to capsule sponge testing? Similarly, why is
"oesophageal surgery" a contraindication - I can understand this for malignant oesophageal
surgery but many patients who have had a fundoplication for reflux still need ongoing
endoscopic surveillance.
2. How did the authors define "reflux"? This has not been elaborated. Were they just looking
at typical symptoms?
3. It is a little concerning that only 42% of the cohort were male. This goes against most other
studies looking at reflux and those at risk. Part of the problem might be the inclusion criteria.
It is well documented that many male patients have silent reflux. Perhaps the inclusion criteria
should have been expanded at the outset of the study to include referrals for male, obese, age
range 40-65, etc? Can the authors comment.
4. Clearly, it would have been ideal to follow on with endoscopy for all patients undergoing
capsule sponge testing. Then, it could be compared against the gold standard. This is a major
limitation of the study. Please comment on the decision not to follow on with endoscopy for
this study.
5. I am not sure I agree with a statement in the Discussion stating that endoscopy is not a
perfect test and that 14-24% of cancer cases are post-endoscopy. Can the authors comment on
whether they would follow on with another study designed to evaluate for the presence of missed
pathology.
6. No mention is made in the Discussion re. other technology which could be used to better
stratify patients who need an endoscopy for reflux disease. What about mucosal impedance, for
example?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-024-03503-5 (2024)

Title: Clinical application of capsule sponge testing in symptomatic reflux disease: a national
prospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 17 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Maged Tharwat Elghannam
Reviewer's report:
The authors aimed retrospectively to evaluate the value of capsule sponge tests in cases with
reflux symptoms with positive or negative biomarkers to eliminate the need for EGD and to
decrease the costs. This is important during the epidemics. The most important point is the false
negative tests.
I have a few comments:
-The capsule sponge test is not that familiar to many doctors and it is better to be mentioned in
more detail in the methodology section.
-CytoSCOT (Scottish Cytology Oesophageal Test) program. I think this needs a few details.
-12% had false positive tests. Can you add an explanation to this high figure?
-In the limitations section,  you must include that it is a retrospective study.