Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Is there a correlation between inflammatory marker s and coagulation parameters in 
women with advanced ovarian endometriosis?  
 
Version: 0 Date: 07 May 2018  
 
Reviewer: C. Matthew Peterson  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The manuscript BMWH -D-18-00149 has interesting information and the authors are to be 
commended for carrying out this inves tigation, however, the following issues must be 
addressed.  
 
1. The manuscript needs to be rewritten with the help of a native English speaker.  
 
2. The confidence intervals for AUC for CA125 vs CA125x fibrinogen overlap and statistical 
evidence of superiority needs to be provided before the statement "The combination, which 
was calculated by multiplying CA -125 levels by fibrinogen, is superior for differentiating 
endometriomas from other benign ovarian cysts" can be made.  
 
3. The benign ovarian cyst group is primarily benign teratoma. The study should clearly point 
this out as radiologically differentiating an endometrioma from other cysts (especially a 
teratoma) is usually not difficult - thus, what is the value of the marker or set of markers?  
 
4. A larger pool of benign ovarian cyst types would add strength to the potential conclusions 
regarding the differences noted.  
 
5. Additional attention to the organization of the discussion will assist the reader in 
recognizing the pathways discussed. A figure may be of benefit.  
 
I recommend rejection. While the information is interesting it is comparing a unique set of 
cysts (endometrioma v teratoma) and its value is questionable.   
 
 
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 autho rs. 
 
Unable to assess  
 
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 manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I recommend addit ional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript : 
 
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited  
 
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 cont ent 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, I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I 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 f or 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://creativeco mmons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that 
any comments which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as 
confidential comments to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal