Review for 10.1186/s12876-018-0919-3 (2018)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Endoscopic and clinicopathological features of intramucosal, histologically mixed -type, 
low-grade, well -differentiated gastric tubular adenocarcinoma with the potenti al for late -onset 
lymph node metastasis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 17 Sep 2018  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS: To view the full report from the academic peer reviewer, 
please see the attached file.  
 
REVIEWER COMMENTS FROM REPORT: A comprehensive and detailed retrospective 
analysis examining a genuine area of medical uncertainty.  
The manuscri pt is well written and referenced, and displays a solid grasp of the issues and 
pathology.  
The figures, flowchart and tables are clear and add to the understanding and comprehension.  
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
Given the 8 -year longitudinal nature o f the study, has the clinical or pathology technique 
changed in any way that might impact on the study findings?  
A minor point, but some abbreviations are not spelled out on first use.  
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 necessary 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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any sta tistics 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.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality 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 year s 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 a ny 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.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Squ are. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a smal l honorarium for completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I u nderstand 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 repor t 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 e ditors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal