Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of a Mailed Educational Reminder to Increase
Colorectal Cancer Screening
Version: 1Date:19 November 2010
Reviewer: Guy Launoy
Reviewer's report:
This paper reports results from a cost-effectiveness study from which results
concerning effectiveness have been already published. The new output concerns
thus only cost aspects. The relevance of results concerning cost is limited by
1 the non-reproducibility of costs in other screening organisation and moreover in
other countries. 2- the very limited effective, 3 - the poor part of cost of a
reminder in the global budget of screening experience.
Moreover, authors problematic and references are very limited to north america
experiences.
Concerning study design, econometric and statistical analysis, the study has
been well-conducted. The paper is well-writed, well-structured and pleasant to
read
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of a Mailed Educational Reminder to Increase
Colorectal Cancer Screening
Version: 1Date:19 November 2010
Reviewer: Guy Launoy
Reviewer's report:
This paper reports results from a cost-effectiveness study from which results
concerning effectiveness have been already published. The new output concerns
thus only cost aspects. The relevance of results concerning cost is limited by
1 the non-reproducibility of costs in other screening organisation and moreover in
other countries. 2- the very limited effective, 3 - the poor part of cost of a
reminder in the global budget of screening experience.
Moreover, authors problematic and references are very limited to north america
experiences.
Concerning study design, econometric and statistical analysis, the study has
been well-conducted. The paper is well-writed, well-structured and pleasant to
read
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of a Mailed Educational Reminder to Increase
Colorectal Cancer Screening
Version: 1Date:19 November 2010
Reviewer: Guy Launoy
Reviewer's report:
This paper reports results from a cost-effectiveness study from which results
concerning effectiveness have been already published. The new output concerns
thus only cost aspects. The relevance of results concerning cost is limited by
1 the non-reproducibility of costs in other screening organisation and moreover in
other countries. 2- the very limited effective, 3 - the poor part of cost of a
reminder in the global budget of screening experience.
Moreover, authors problematic and references are very limited to north america
experiences.
Concerning study design, econometric and statistical analysis, the study has
been well-conducted. The paper is well-writed, well-structured and pleasant to
read
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
assistant