Title: The effect of BMI on long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer and establishment
of a nomogram prediction model
Version: 3 Date: 30 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: The effect of BMI on the long-term outcome of rectal cancer
patients and establishment of a nomogram prediction model
General Comments
This manuscript was meant to report on the factors that are associated with delay in reporting for
surgical care among patients with acute abdomen attended at the Muhimbili National Hospital.
In its present form the manuscript is not fit to be considered for publication and it requires
considerable improvements in the write-up.
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) The length is Okay.
ii) Grammatical the title is not correct. It should be ‘…long term outcome in patients with rectal
cancer.
Recommendation: Please rephrase the title.
Abstract:
i) The background does reflect the title and the aim.
ii) The aim of the article has not been stated.
iii) In the material & methods, and results sections the authors have used abbreviations without
indicating what they stand for. Not acceptable.
iv) Results: described well
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective.
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used. Avoid using abbreviations, not everyone
is familiar with these abbreviations.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
ii) Some keywords are appropriate.
Recommendation: None.
Introduction:
i) The introduction describes the area of interest clearly.
ii) The rationale for carrying out this study is clear
iii) The objectives is written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references is not uniform.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is acceptable.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in this manuscript. The last part where the
authors are describing the use of univariate and multivariate analysis is out of place, it should
be in the material and methods section and not the introduction.
Material and method:
i) Study duration described.
ii) The sampling technique has been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How data handling was done is acceptable.
v) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the grammar.
Results:
i) The results section is acceptable.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: improve the English please.
Discussion:
i) The authors are discussing the results.
ii) The discussion has a good flow of information.
iii) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community
and for the practice in brief.
iv) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: improve the grammar.
Conclusion:
i) The authors have summarized the main points of the research clearly
Recommendation: none
References and citations:
i) References are written as per journals guidelines.
ii) The number of references is acceptable.
Recommendation: None
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is well organized and balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: None
Tables:
i) Acceptable number of tables.
Recommendation: none
English:
i) The English used in the article is poor.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in the manuscript.
Logic:
i) The article has been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar throughout the mnuscript.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
Overall Assessment of the manuscript,
The authors are firstly congratulated for showing interest in coming up with this study. Overall,
the article has been well written, and the flow of information is satisfactory in all sections. The
grammar used is not standard. The authors may seek help from an expert in English language.
Title: The effect of BMI on long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer and establishment
of a nomogram prediction model
Version: 3 Date: 30 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: The effect of BMI on the long-term outcome of rectal cancer
patients and establishment of a nomogram prediction model
General Comments
This manuscript was meant to report on the factors that are associated with delay in reporting for
surgical care among patients with acute abdomen attended at the Muhimbili National Hospital.
In its present form the manuscript is not fit to be considered for publication and it requires
considerable improvements in the write-up.
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) The length is Okay.
ii) Grammatical the title is not correct. It should be ‘…long term outcome in patients with rectal
cancer.
Recommendation: Please rephrase the title.
Abstract:
i) The background does reflect the title and the aim.
ii) The aim of the article has not been stated.
iii) In the material & methods, and results sections the authors have used abbreviations without
indicating what they stand for. Not acceptable.
iv) Results: described well
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective.
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used. Avoid using abbreviations, not everyone
is familiar with these abbreviations.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
ii) Some keywords are appropriate.
Recommendation: None.
Introduction:
i) The introduction describes the area of interest clearly.
ii) The rationale for carrying out this study is clear
iii) The objectives is written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references is not uniform.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is acceptable.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in this manuscript. The last part where the
authors are describing the use of univariate and multivariate analysis is out of place, it should
be in the material and methods section and not the introduction.
Material and method:
i) Study duration described.
ii) The sampling technique has been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How data handling was done is acceptable.
v) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the grammar.
Results:
i) The results section is acceptable.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: improve the English please.
Discussion:
i) The authors are discussing the results.
ii) The discussion has a good flow of information.
iii) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community
and for the practice in brief.
iv) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: improve the grammar.
Conclusion:
i) The authors have summarized the main points of the research clearly
Recommendation: none
References and citations:
i) References are written as per journals guidelines.
ii) The number of references is acceptable.
Recommendation: None
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is well organized and balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: None
Tables:
i) Acceptable number of tables.
Recommendation: none
English:
i) The English used in the article is poor.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in the manuscript.
Logic:
i) The article has been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar throughout the mnuscript.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
Overall Assessment of the manuscript,
The authors are firstly congratulated for showing interest in coming up with this study. Overall,
the article has been well written, and the flow of information is satisfactory in all sections. The
grammar used is not standard. The authors may seek help from an expert in English language.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The effect of BMI on long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer and establishment
of a nomogram prediction model
Version: 3 Date: 30 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer of Manuscript titled: The effect of BMI on the long-term outcome of rectal cancer
patients and establishment of a nomogram prediction model
General Comments
This manuscript was meant to report on the factors that are associated with delay in reporting for
surgical care among patients with acute abdomen attended at the Muhimbili National Hospital.
In its present form the manuscript is not fit to be considered for publication and it requires
considerable improvements in the write-up.
Section-wise comments
The Title:
i) The length is Okay.
ii) Grammatical the title is not correct. It should be ‘…long term outcome in patients with rectal
cancer.
Recommendation: Please rephrase the title.
Abstract:
i) The background does reflect the title and the aim.
ii) The aim of the article has not been stated.
iii) In the material & methods, and results sections the authors have used abbreviations without
indicating what they stand for. Not acceptable.
iv) Results: described well
v) Conclusion: does answer the objective.
vi) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used. Avoid using abbreviations, not everyone
is familiar with these abbreviations.
Keywords:
i) The numbers of Keywords are acceptable.
ii) Some keywords are appropriate.
Recommendation: None.
Introduction:
i) The introduction describes the area of interest clearly.
ii) The rationale for carrying out this study is clear
iii) The objectives is written clearly.
iv) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
v) The citation of references is not uniform.
vi) The knowledge gap that the authors are trying to address is apparent.
vii) The flow of information is acceptable.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in this manuscript. The last part where the
authors are describing the use of univariate and multivariate analysis is out of place, it should
be in the material and methods section and not the introduction.
Material and method:
i) Study duration described.
ii) The sampling technique has been described.
iii) Inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described.
iv) How data handling was done is acceptable.
v) Significant grammatical errors were noted.
Recommendation: Please improve the grammar.
Results:
i) The results section is acceptable.
ii) Significant grammatical errors
Recommendation: improve the English please.
Discussion:
i) The authors are discussing the results.
ii) The discussion has a good flow of information.
iii) The authors have not disclosed the importance of the research findings to the community
and for the practice in brief.
iv) Significant grammatical errors.
Recommendation: improve the grammar.
Conclusion:
i) The authors have summarized the main points of the research clearly
Recommendation: none
References and citations:
i) References are written as per journals guidelines.
ii) The number of references is acceptable.
Recommendation: None
Structure and length:
i) It is a moderately lengthy paper.
ii) The article is well organized and balanced.
iii) It has some relevant information.
Recommendation: None
Tables:
i) Acceptable number of tables.
Recommendation: none
English:
i) The English used in the article is poor.
ii) There are significant grammatical mistakes.
Recommendation: Please improve the English used in the manuscript.
Logic:
i) The article has been written clearly
ii) There is a violation of grammar throughout the mnuscript.
Recommendation: English used in the manuscript requires significant improvement.
Overall Assessment of the manuscript,
The authors are firstly congratulated for showing interest in coming up with this study. Overall,
the article has been well written, and the flow of information is satisfactory in all sections. The
grammar used is not standard. The authors may seek help from an expert in English language.
assistant