Reviewer’s report
Title: Causative factors of liver fibrosis in HIV-infected patients. A single center study.
Version: 1 Date: 31 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Mark H. Kuniholm
Reviewer's report:
Table 3 is labeled as "Univariate analysis of study parameters. Only those that achieved statistical
significance are displayed" This title is not particularly informative because it does not mention the
outcome under study - liver fibrosis - which is in this study a binary (yes/no) outcome. Furthermore, in
the footnote of Table 3 the authors  indicate that they are using an r square statistic to consider
associations between continuous participant characteristics (e.g., ALT) and the study outcome (i.e.,
fibrosis - yes/no). This is incorrect. Even when a continuous exposure variable is being considered, the
authors need to use a statistical test for a binary outcome - in this case a t-test would be appropriate. An
r square statistic is calculated to assess the association between two continuous variables.
I do not understand what the authors mean by "The variables associated with higher LS values are
shown on Table 4, this multivariate model had 92.2% concordance." 
Table 4 looks like raw SAS output. Please format the table as appropriate for publication. Also, the
effect estimates shown in Table 4 are surprising and potentially incorrect. For example, an odds ratio of
1.1 (95% CI: 1.0 - 1.2) should not generally have a p-value of 0.0023. The odds ratio for the CD4/CD8
ratio is also surprisingly low: 0.04 (95% CI: 0.003 - 0.540). A continuous variable like CD4/CD8 ratio
generally has an odds ratio slightly above or slightly below 1.0. Table 5 has similar limitations. There
are grammatical errors throughout the manuscript.     
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
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.
No
Are 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 statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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
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 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 report 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 editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
Reviewer’s report
Title: Causative factors of liver fibrosis in HIV-infected patients. A single center study.
Version: 1 Date: 31 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Mark H. Kuniholm
Reviewer's report:
Table 3 is labeled as "Univariate analysis of study parameters. Only those that achieved statistical
significance are displayed" This title is not particularly informative because it does not mention the
outcome under study - liver fibrosis - which is in this study a binary (yes/no) outcome. Furthermore, in
the footnote of Table 3 the authors  indicate that they are using an r square statistic to consider
associations between continuous participant characteristics (e.g., ALT) and the study outcome (i.e.,
fibrosis - yes/no). This is incorrect. Even when a continuous exposure variable is being considered, the
authors need to use a statistical test for a binary outcome - in this case a t-test would be appropriate. An
r square statistic is calculated to assess the association between two continuous variables.
I do not understand what the authors mean by "The variables associated with higher LS values are
shown on Table 4, this multivariate model had 92.2% concordance." 
Table 4 looks like raw SAS output. Please format the table as appropriate for publication. Also, the
effect estimates shown in Table 4 are surprising and potentially incorrect. For example, an odds ratio of
1.1 (95% CI: 1.0 - 1.2) should not generally have a p-value of 0.0023. The odds ratio for the CD4/CD8
ratio is also surprisingly low: 0.04 (95% CI: 0.003 - 0.540). A continuous variable like CD4/CD8 ratio
generally has an odds ratio slightly above or slightly below 1.0. Table 5 has similar limitations. There
are grammatical errors throughout the manuscript.     
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
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.
No
Are 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 statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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
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 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 report 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 editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer’s report
Title: Causative factors of liver fibrosis in HIV-infected patients. A single center study.
Version: 1 Date: 31 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Mark H. Kuniholm
Reviewer's report:
Table 3 is labeled as "Univariate analysis of study parameters. Only those that achieved statistical
significance are displayed" This title is not particularly informative because it does not mention the
outcome under study - liver fibrosis - which is in this study a binary (yes/no) outcome. Furthermore, in
the footnote of Table 3 the authors  indicate that they are using an r square statistic to consider
associations between continuous participant characteristics (e.g., ALT) and the study outcome (i.e.,
fibrosis - yes/no). This is incorrect. Even when a continuous exposure variable is being considered, the
authors need to use a statistical test for a binary outcome - in this case a t-test would be appropriate. An
r square statistic is calculated to assess the association between two continuous variables.
I do not understand what the authors mean by "The variables associated with higher LS values are
shown on Table 4, this multivariate model had 92.2% concordance." 
Table 4 looks like raw SAS output. Please format the table as appropriate for publication. Also, the
effect estimates shown in Table 4 are surprising and potentially incorrect. For example, an odds ratio of
1.1 (95% CI: 1.0 - 1.2) should not generally have a p-value of 0.0023. The odds ratio for the CD4/CD8
ratio is also surprisingly low: 0.04 (95% CI: 0.003 - 0.540). A continuous variable like CD4/CD8 ratio
generally has an odds ratio slightly above or slightly below 1.0. Table 5 has similar limitations. There
are grammatical errors throughout the manuscript.     
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
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.
No
Are 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 statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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
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 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 report 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 editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
assistant