Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Validation of Serrated Polyps (SPs) in Swedish Path ology Registers  
 
Version: 0 Date: 15 Sep 2019  
 
Reviewer: Jessica Yu  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The authors validated a Swedish histopathology database for identifying serrated polyps and 
found it to be highly reliable.  
1) In the methods section, it would be helpful to provide additional description of the 
ESPRESSO dataset particularly the size, linkage to other clinical datasets etc.  
2) How were patients with multiple polyps analyzed in the study? Were there patients with 
more than 1 serrated polyp and if so how did this affect the analysis  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the autho rs. 
 
Yes 
 
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire 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:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, eithe r now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat 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 r elating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization t hat 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing inter ests?  
 
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.  
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my named report 
including any at tachments 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 in cluded as confidential comme nts 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Validation of Serrated Polyps (SPs) in Swedish Path ology Registers  
 
Version: 0 Date: 15 Sep 2019  
 
Reviewer: Jessica Yu  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The authors validated a Swedish histopathology database for identifying serrated polyps and 
found it to be highly reliable.  
1) In the methods section, it would be helpful to provide additional description of the 
ESPRESSO dataset particularly the size, linkage to other clinical datasets etc.  
2) How were patients with multiple polyps analyzed in the study? Were there patients with 
more than 1 serrated polyp and if so how did this affect the analysis  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the autho rs. 
 
Yes 
 
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire 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:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, eithe r now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat 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 r elating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization t hat 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing inter ests?  
 
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.  
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my named report 
including any at tachments 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 in cluded as confidential comme nts 
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: Validation of Serrated Polyps (SPs) in Swedish Path ology Registers  
 
Version: 0 Date: 15 Sep 2019  
 
Reviewer: Jessica Yu  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The authors validated a Swedish histopathology database for identifying serrated polyps and 
found it to be highly reliable.  
1) In the methods section, it would be helpful to provide additional description of the 
ESPRESSO dataset particularly the size, linkage to other clinical datasets etc.  
2) How were patients with multiple polyps analyzed in the study? Were there patients with 
more than 1 serrated polyp and if so how did this affect the analysis  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the autho rs. 
 
Yes 
 
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire 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:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, eithe r now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat 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 r elating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization t hat 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing inter ests?  
 
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.  
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my named report 
including any at tachments 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 in cluded as confidential comme nts 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant