Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The overall impression of the study is very good, the authors
have presented and processed the topic of their study well, and with minor corrections and
clarifications, the manuscript is ready for publication.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The authors should further clarify Model 1 and Model 2, which would be found in the methods
and results (including text and tables). Furthermore, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the
test group and the control group would be clearer in a tabular presentation.
A sentence in the Dietary intake chapter: "These weights are then multiplied by the
corresponding food components, and the scores are summed up, then divided by 1000 to decrease
the scores' magnitude, making it easier to describe the results." asks for clarification in my
opinion.
In Table 3, which is important for the results and conclusions, not all abbreviations are explained
in the legend.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Maybe add the questionnaire used in the study to the supplementary material
Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The overall impression of the study is very good, the authors
have presented and processed the topic of their study well, and with minor corrections and
clarifications, the manuscript is ready for publication.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The authors should further clarify Model 1 and Model 2, which would be found in the methods
and results (including text and tables). Furthermore, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the
test group and the control group would be clearer in a tabular presentation.
A sentence in the Dietary intake chapter: "These weights are then multiplied by the
corresponding food components, and the scores are summed up, then divided by 1000 to decrease
the scores' magnitude, making it easier to describe the results." asks for clarification in my
opinion.
In Table 3, which is important for the results and conclusions, not all abbreviations are explained
in the legend.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Maybe add the questionnaire used in the study to the supplementary material
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The overall impression of the study is very good, the authors
have presented and processed the topic of their study well, and with minor corrections and
clarifications, the manuscript is ready for publication.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The authors should further clarify Model 1 and Model 2, which would be found in the methods
and results (including text and tables). Furthermore, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the
test group and the control group would be clearer in a tabular presentation.
A sentence in the Dietary intake chapter: "These weights are then multiplied by the
corresponding food components, and the scores are summed up, then divided by 1000 to decrease
the scores' magnitude, making it easier to describe the results." asks for clarification in my
opinion.
In Table 3, which is important for the results and conclusions, not all abbreviations are explained
in the legend.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Maybe add the questionnaire used in the study to the supplementary material
assistant