Reviewer's report 
 The effect of straining on the diaphragmatic crura with identification of the straining-crural Title: 
reflex. The reflex theory in gastroesophagael competence: a new concept 
 2  19 March 2004 Version: Date: 
 James Francis Xavier FX Jones Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
The authors replied "The method of stimuli timing was already described on page 5 in the 5th paragraph" 
This is true but it is still not clear how the millisecond latencies were calculated. This is my guess: the 
movement artefact associated with straining appeared on the crural EMG and then the time to the 
first muscle action potential was measured as an index of latency. Is this correct? Perhaps there 
was some timing system operated at the moment of endotracheal movement? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
The authors did not correct this : 
P2 last sentence check spelling of gastro-esophageal (the p is missing). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
None 
Reviewer's report 
 The effect of straining on the diaphragmatic crura with identification of the straining-crural Title: 
reflex. The reflex theory in gastroesophagael competence: a new concept 
 2  19 March 2004 Version: Date: 
 James Francis Xavier FX Jones Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
The authors replied "The method of stimuli timing was already described on page 5 in the 5th paragraph" 
This is true but it is still not clear how the millisecond latencies were calculated. This is my guess: the 
movement artefact associated with straining appeared on the crural EMG and then the time to the 
first muscle action potential was measured as an index of latency. Is this correct? Perhaps there 
was some timing system operated at the moment of endotracheal movement? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
The authors did not correct this : 
P2 last sentence check spelling of gastro-esophageal (the p is missing). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
None 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 The effect of straining on the diaphragmatic crura with identification of the straining-crural Title: 
reflex. The reflex theory in gastroesophagael competence: a new concept 
 2  19 March 2004 Version: Date: 
 James Francis Xavier FX Jones Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) 
The authors replied "The method of stimuli timing was already described on page 5 in the 5th paragraph" 
This is true but it is still not clear how the millisecond latencies were calculated. This is my guess: the 
movement artefact associated with straining appeared on the crural EMG and then the time to the 
first muscle action potential was measured as an index of latency. Is this correct? Perhaps there 
was some timing system operated at the moment of endotracheal movement? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
The authors did not correct this : 
P2 last sentence check spelling of gastro-esophageal (the p is missing). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
None 
assistant