Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01305-z (2020)

Reviewer’ s report
Title: Knowledge and practices of primary care physicians or general practitioners treating post-
infectious irritable bowel syndrome
Version: 1Date: 10 Apr 2020
Reviewer: Peyman - Adibi
Reviewer's report:
This is an investigation about a very common chronic functional condition in family practice and
internal medicine . But the study lakes many importation methodological considerations : 1-Study objective Although the title presents "Knowledge " but the method that was used does notmeasure it at all. Knowledge measurement is quite like a exam ; it needs defining essential contentof knowledge that may be used to draft representative questions which form a content-validatedtool.Then method of measurement and implementation may be selected (MCQ -Written-OSCE... ).Then construct validity and reliability must be evaluated .The measured variable mostly reportsroutine practice of a sample of physicians as it is but without evaluation or assessment .2-Sample Itis a limited volume of practicing physicians that make result generalizavblity difficult. 2 persons(one pathologist , one anesthesiologist ) do not fit the hypothetical inclusion criteria3- Report ofresults Page 6 line 120: The responders to one question may be present within respondents to otherquestions so they are not "others" ! A proportion of the studied sample may agree with eachquestion .4-The main novel finding of this study is table 3 that may be used as a preliminary studyto promote IBS-QOL questionnaires.5- There is a well-known publication by Rome Foundationteam that describes PI-IBS and its criteria ; The authors did not referred to it . https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085(18)34766-8/abstract
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
NoDoes the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.
NoAre 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 further
assessment in your comments to the editors.
I am able to assess the statisticsQuality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Acceptable
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 thismanuscript, 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.
NoneI 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