Title: Safety Comparison of Single-Donor and Pooled Fecal Microbiota Transfer Product
Preparation in Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 3 Date: 22 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The objectives of the study are clear. The rationale to consider differences in AE from MDN
v SDN needs clearer explanation.
The methodology is rigorous and well performed, but the manuscript still focuses too heavily
on methods that could be described in supplementary materials.
The authors need to describe how differences in number and frequencies of MDN or SDN might
affect the outomes analysed rather than MDN or SDN and how this is accounted for in the
analysis.
It is confusing to state "results indicate a non-significantly increased risk"- this would suggest
the risk is not increased.
likewise "a non-significantly higher benefit-risk ratio.." is a confusing term.
It would seem the results show no difference in risk or risk/benefit ratio with MDN.
It would be useful to clarify the timescale of AEs and limitations of follow up durations.
Title: Safety Comparison of Single-Donor and Pooled Fecal Microbiota Transfer Product
Preparation in Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 3 Date: 22 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The objectives of the study are clear. The rationale to consider differences in AE from MDN
v SDN needs clearer explanation.
The methodology is rigorous and well performed, but the manuscript still focuses too heavily
on methods that could be described in supplementary materials.
The authors need to describe how differences in number and frequencies of MDN or SDN might
affect the outomes analysed rather than MDN or SDN and how this is accounted for in the
analysis.
It is confusing to state "results indicate a non-significantly increased risk"- this would suggest
the risk is not increased.
likewise "a non-significantly higher benefit-risk ratio.." is a confusing term.
It would seem the results show no difference in risk or risk/benefit ratio with MDN.
It would be useful to clarify the timescale of AEs and limitations of follow up durations.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Safety Comparison of Single-Donor and Pooled Fecal Microbiota Transfer Product
Preparation in Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 3 Date: 22 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The objectives of the study are clear. The rationale to consider differences in AE from MDN
v SDN needs clearer explanation.
The methodology is rigorous and well performed, but the manuscript still focuses too heavily
on methods that could be described in supplementary materials.
The authors need to describe how differences in number and frequencies of MDN or SDN might
affect the outomes analysed rather than MDN or SDN and how this is accounted for in the
analysis.
It is confusing to state "results indicate a non-significantly increased risk"- this would suggest
the risk is not increased.
likewise "a non-significantly higher benefit-risk ratio.." is a confusing term.
It would seem the results show no difference in risk or risk/benefit ratio with MDN.
It would be useful to clarify the timescale of AEs and limitations of follow up durations.
assistant