Title: FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH DELAYED REPORTING FOR SURGICAL
CARE AMONG PATIENTS WITH SURGICAL ACUTE ABDOMEN ATTENDED AT
MUHIMBILI NATIONAL HOSPITAL – TANZANIA.
Version: 5 Date: 05 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Karpal Singh Sohal
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: Factors associated with delay in reporting for surgical care among
patients with surgical acute abdomen attended at Muhimbili National Hospital – Tanzania.
General Comments
The authors are congratulated for making significant improvements in their work
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) Ok
Recommendation: None
Abstract:
i) The background is acceptable
ii) The aim of the article has been stated.
iii) Results: described well, but very bulky.
iv) This seems out of place: An appropriate surgeon’s task force (52.7%) was also a factor to
cause a late surgical acute abdomen for those patients although was not statically significant.
The authors aim to determine factors that contribute to late presentation to health facility and
not late surgical intervention. They are two different issues.
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective (which has not been stated, but based on the title).
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
vii) Over all the abstract is very bulky (i.e 460 words)
Recommendation: Please correct the few queries raised. There is need for English language
improvement.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
Recommendation: none.
Introduction:
i) The introduction still fails to describe the area of interest clearly. It is still not directly recline
the objective of the study.
ii) The rationale for carrying out the study has been made apparent
iii) The objectives have to be written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references used is made accordingly.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is poor.
Recommendation: Please restructure the introduction and seek help from an expert in English
language
Material and method:
i) What was the duration of this study? Though it has been mentioned in abstract, in the main
document it is still missing.
ii) The sampling technique used has not been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How did the authors group various factors?
v) The statistical analysis part has been improved.
vi) How data handling was done is acceptable.
vii) What were the criteria used to define acute abdomen in this study has been described
viii) The Statement of ethical clearance has been given.
ix) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please make sure all queries are taken care of.
Results:
i) The results section is improved.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Discussion:
i) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community and
for the practice in brief.
ii) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: please respond to the queries.
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is still not well organized nor balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: Please improve the flow of information, especially in the introduction section.
Tables:
i) A very well done job, 2 tables are acceptable.
Recommendation : None
English:
i) The English used in the article is not acceptable.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes, that hinder the reader to understand the
information being presented.
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Logic:
i) The article has not been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar that hinder one to grab information easily.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
Title: FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH DELAYED REPORTING FOR SURGICAL
CARE AMONG PATIENTS WITH SURGICAL ACUTE ABDOMEN ATTENDED AT
MUHIMBILI NATIONAL HOSPITAL – TANZANIA.
Version: 5 Date: 05 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Karpal Singh Sohal
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: Factors associated with delay in reporting for surgical care among
patients with surgical acute abdomen attended at Muhimbili National Hospital – Tanzania.
General Comments
The authors are congratulated for making significant improvements in their work
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) Ok
Recommendation: None
Abstract:
i) The background is acceptable
ii) The aim of the article has been stated.
iii) Results: described well, but very bulky.
iv) This seems out of place: An appropriate surgeon’s task force (52.7%) was also a factor to
cause a late surgical acute abdomen for those patients although was not statically significant.
The authors aim to determine factors that contribute to late presentation to health facility and
not late surgical intervention. They are two different issues.
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective (which has not been stated, but based on the title).
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
vii) Over all the abstract is very bulky (i.e 460 words)
Recommendation: Please correct the few queries raised. There is need for English language
improvement.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
Recommendation: none.
Introduction:
i) The introduction still fails to describe the area of interest clearly. It is still not directly recline
the objective of the study.
ii) The rationale for carrying out the study has been made apparent
iii) The objectives have to be written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references used is made accordingly.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is poor.
Recommendation: Please restructure the introduction and seek help from an expert in English
language
Material and method:
i) What was the duration of this study? Though it has been mentioned in abstract, in the main
document it is still missing.
ii) The sampling technique used has not been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How did the authors group various factors?
v) The statistical analysis part has been improved.
vi) How data handling was done is acceptable.
vii) What were the criteria used to define acute abdomen in this study has been described
viii) The Statement of ethical clearance has been given.
ix) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please make sure all queries are taken care of.
Results:
i) The results section is improved.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Discussion:
i) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community and
for the practice in brief.
ii) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: please respond to the queries.
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is still not well organized nor balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: Please improve the flow of information, especially in the introduction section.
Tables:
i) A very well done job, 2 tables are acceptable.
Recommendation : None
English:
i) The English used in the article is not acceptable.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes, that hinder the reader to understand the
information being presented.
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Logic:
i) The article has not been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar that hinder one to grab information easily.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH DELAYED REPORTING FOR SURGICAL
CARE AMONG PATIENTS WITH SURGICAL ACUTE ABDOMEN ATTENDED AT
MUHIMBILI NATIONAL HOSPITAL – TANZANIA.
Version: 5 Date: 05 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Karpal Singh Sohal
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: Factors associated with delay in reporting for surgical care among
patients with surgical acute abdomen attended at Muhimbili National Hospital – Tanzania.
General Comments
The authors are congratulated for making significant improvements in their work
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) Ok
Recommendation: None
Abstract:
i) The background is acceptable
ii) The aim of the article has been stated.
iii) Results: described well, but very bulky.
iv) This seems out of place: An appropriate surgeon’s task force (52.7%) was also a factor to
cause a late surgical acute abdomen for those patients although was not statically significant.
The authors aim to determine factors that contribute to late presentation to health facility and
not late surgical intervention. They are two different issues.
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective (which has not been stated, but based on the title).
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
vii) Over all the abstract is very bulky (i.e 460 words)
Recommendation: Please correct the few queries raised. There is need for English language
improvement.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
Recommendation: none.
Introduction:
i) The introduction still fails to describe the area of interest clearly. It is still not directly recline
the objective of the study.
ii) The rationale for carrying out the study has been made apparent
iii) The objectives have to be written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references used is made accordingly.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is poor.
Recommendation: Please restructure the introduction and seek help from an expert in English
language
Material and method:
i) What was the duration of this study? Though it has been mentioned in abstract, in the main
document it is still missing.
ii) The sampling technique used has not been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How did the authors group various factors?
v) The statistical analysis part has been improved.
vi) How data handling was done is acceptable.
vii) What were the criteria used to define acute abdomen in this study has been described
viii) The Statement of ethical clearance has been given.
ix) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please make sure all queries are taken care of.
Results:
i) The results section is improved.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Discussion:
i) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community and
for the practice in brief.
ii) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: please respond to the queries.
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is still not well organized nor balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: Please improve the flow of information, especially in the introduction section.
Tables:
i) A very well done job, 2 tables are acceptable.
Recommendation : None
English:
i) The English used in the article is not acceptable.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes, that hinder the reader to understand the
information being presented.
Recommendation: Please seek help from an expert in English language
Logic:
i) The article has not been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar that hinder one to grab information easily.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
assistant