Title: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Constipation-predominant Irritable
Bowel Syndrome and Functional Constipation in Adults: A Scoping Review
Version: 1 Date: 30 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for an interesting scoping review on the differences between clinical practice
guidelines (CPGs) for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with predominant constipation (IBS-C) and
Functional Constipation (FC) in different countries over time. Here are my suggestions for
clarifying your manuscript even further.
An overall comment: I lack discussion around that and why the CPGs do not follow the existing
Rome criteria (in this case Rome III and IV) as these criteria are used and accepted worldwide.
Please adjust reference 2, as this reference is from the year 1990, and thus cannot include either
of Rome III or Rome IV criteria.
The numbers are mixed up in row 96. The prevalence for FC is 11.7% and for IBS-D 1.3%.
The sentence in row 109-110 is not complete.
Please consider rephrasing rows 117-118.
I would suggest to move the sentence in rows 217-218 to the discussion part.
Please consider moving the sentence in rows 318-321 to the part on serotonin later on in the
discussion.
Please elucidate on “changing is lack of evidence” in row 340.
I miss references to the questionnaires mentioned in rows 349-351. Also, row 351 is the only
part where quality of life is mentioned in the manuscript. Please consider removing it, as the
other parts of the discussion are more focused on biometrics.
The study described in rows 419-424 is interesting, but I lack a description with which patient
group or healthy the oleamide levels in FC was compared. This is interesting to know, especially
if the comparison group was IBS-C.
For the figures and tables, please consider following: Remove Figure 2 and replace it with
Supplementary Figure 5a-c. Remove Figure 3 and use Supplementary Figure 5d-f instead, with
specifying which variable was mentioned for IBS and which for FC. Remove Supplementary
File 6a-b from the supplementary material and merge them into one regular table. Please adjust
Figure numbers, as Figure 4 is missing.
Title: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Constipation-predominant Irritable
Bowel Syndrome and Functional Constipation in Adults: A Scoping Review
Version: 1 Date: 30 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for an interesting scoping review on the differences between clinical practice
guidelines (CPGs) for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with predominant constipation (IBS-C) and
Functional Constipation (FC) in different countries over time. Here are my suggestions for
clarifying your manuscript even further.
An overall comment: I lack discussion around that and why the CPGs do not follow the existing
Rome criteria (in this case Rome III and IV) as these criteria are used and accepted worldwide.
Please adjust reference 2, as this reference is from the year 1990, and thus cannot include either
of Rome III or Rome IV criteria.
The numbers are mixed up in row 96. The prevalence for FC is 11.7% and for IBS-D 1.3%.
The sentence in row 109-110 is not complete.
Please consider rephrasing rows 117-118.
I would suggest to move the sentence in rows 217-218 to the discussion part.
Please consider moving the sentence in rows 318-321 to the part on serotonin later on in the
discussion.
Please elucidate on “changing is lack of evidence” in row 340.
I miss references to the questionnaires mentioned in rows 349-351. Also, row 351 is the only
part where quality of life is mentioned in the manuscript. Please consider removing it, as the
other parts of the discussion are more focused on biometrics.
The study described in rows 419-424 is interesting, but I lack a description with which patient
group or healthy the oleamide levels in FC was compared. This is interesting to know, especially
if the comparison group was IBS-C.
For the figures and tables, please consider following: Remove Figure 2 and replace it with
Supplementary Figure 5a-c. Remove Figure 3 and use Supplementary Figure 5d-f instead, with
specifying which variable was mentioned for IBS and which for FC. Remove Supplementary
File 6a-b from the supplementary material and merge them into one regular table. Please adjust
Figure numbers, as Figure 4 is missing.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Constipation-predominant Irritable
Bowel Syndrome and Functional Constipation in Adults: A Scoping Review
Version: 1 Date: 30 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for an interesting scoping review on the differences between clinical practice
guidelines (CPGs) for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with predominant constipation (IBS-C) and
Functional Constipation (FC) in different countries over time. Here are my suggestions for
clarifying your manuscript even further.
An overall comment: I lack discussion around that and why the CPGs do not follow the existing
Rome criteria (in this case Rome III and IV) as these criteria are used and accepted worldwide.
Please adjust reference 2, as this reference is from the year 1990, and thus cannot include either
of Rome III or Rome IV criteria.
The numbers are mixed up in row 96. The prevalence for FC is 11.7% and for IBS-D 1.3%.
The sentence in row 109-110 is not complete.
Please consider rephrasing rows 117-118.
I would suggest to move the sentence in rows 217-218 to the discussion part.
Please consider moving the sentence in rows 318-321 to the part on serotonin later on in the
discussion.
Please elucidate on “changing is lack of evidence” in row 340.
I miss references to the questionnaires mentioned in rows 349-351. Also, row 351 is the only
part where quality of life is mentioned in the manuscript. Please consider removing it, as the
other parts of the discussion are more focused on biometrics.
The study described in rows 419-424 is interesting, but I lack a description with which patient
group or healthy the oleamide levels in FC was compared. This is interesting to know, especially
if the comparison group was IBS-C.
For the figures and tables, please consider following: Remove Figure 2 and replace it with
Supplementary Figure 5a-c. Remove Figure 3 and use Supplementary Figure 5d-f instead, with
specifying which variable was mentioned for IBS and which for FC. Remove Supplementary
File 6a-b from the supplementary material and merge them into one regular table. Please adjust
Figure numbers, as Figure 4 is missing.
assistant