Reviewer's report
Title:Application of Weibull Model for Survival of Patients with Gastric Cancer
Version: 1Date:14 October 2010
Reviewer: Dianne Pulte
Reviewer's report:
Summary: The authors discuss the application of the Weibull model to determine
significance of various factors in a multivariate analysis. They conclude that the
Weibull model provides more accurate results than the Cox model.
Overall this is a nice piece of work with interesting implications for multivariate
analysis in cancer research.
Minor revisions:
1. The paper would benefit from being proofread by a native speaker of English.
Discretionary revisions:
2. Further discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of using the Weibull method
and the Cox method would be useful. For example in the first paragraph in the
discussion, the authors mention that it is necessary to check the underlying
assumptions in the Cox model. It would be useful to have examples of these
underlying assumptions and when they may interfere with obtaining a meaningful
result. For example, clarification of why the Weibull model found age to be a
significant factor while the Cox model did not may be helpful, especially for
physicians who are not well versed in statistics.
3. The authors mention that they did not find a significant correlation between
number of lymph nodes and survival, using either model. This is an unexpected
finding and clarification of why this might have been seen, if possible, would be
useful. Does this suggest a limitation to the model or some other factor?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Application of Weibull Model for Survival of Patients with Gastric Cancer
Version: 1Date:14 October 2010
Reviewer: Dianne Pulte
Reviewer's report:
Summary: The authors discuss the application of the Weibull model to determine
significance of various factors in a multivariate analysis. They conclude that the
Weibull model provides more accurate results than the Cox model.
Overall this is a nice piece of work with interesting implications for multivariate
analysis in cancer research.
Minor revisions:
1. The paper would benefit from being proofread by a native speaker of English.
Discretionary revisions:
2. Further discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of using the Weibull method
and the Cox method would be useful. For example in the first paragraph in the
discussion, the authors mention that it is necessary to check the underlying
assumptions in the Cox model. It would be useful to have examples of these
underlying assumptions and when they may interfere with obtaining a meaningful
result. For example, clarification of why the Weibull model found age to be a
significant factor while the Cox model did not may be helpful, especially for
physicians who are not well versed in statistics.
3. The authors mention that they did not find a significant correlation between
number of lymph nodes and survival, using either model. This is an unexpected
finding and clarification of why this might have been seen, if possible, would be
useful. Does this suggest a limitation to the model or some other factor?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Application of Weibull Model for Survival of Patients with Gastric Cancer
Version: 1Date:14 October 2010
Reviewer: Dianne Pulte
Reviewer's report:
Summary: The authors discuss the application of the Weibull model to determine
significance of various factors in a multivariate analysis. They conclude that the
Weibull model provides more accurate results than the Cox model.
Overall this is a nice piece of work with interesting implications for multivariate
analysis in cancer research.
Minor revisions:
1. The paper would benefit from being proofread by a native speaker of English.
Discretionary revisions:
2. Further discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of using the Weibull method
and the Cox method would be useful. For example in the first paragraph in the
discussion, the authors mention that it is necessary to check the underlying
assumptions in the Cox model. It would be useful to have examples of these
underlying assumptions and when they may interfere with obtaining a meaningful
result. For example, clarification of why the Weibull model found age to be a
significant factor while the Cox model did not may be helpful, especially for
physicians who are not well versed in statistics.
3. The authors mention that they did not find a significant correlation between
number of lymph nodes and survival, using either model. This is an unexpected
finding and clarification of why this might have been seen, if possible, would be
useful. Does this suggest a limitation to the model or some other factor?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant