Reviewer's report
Title:How well do Italian family paediatricians approach and manage celiac
disease? A cross-sectional study in Puglia Region, 2012
Version:3Date:6 January 2014
Reviewer: Anna Myleus
Reviewer's report:
1. Regarding the knowledge of CD among the FPs.
I agree with the authors that the knowledge of CD is self-reported (with the
inherent limitations of self-report) and the changes made to the manuscript
highlighting this are good. Still, I disagree with the authors regarding the
interpretation (Answer A1). Even if the study showed that the FPs were the first
to suspect CD in patients with atypical symptoms as well, I think the study
suggests that the FPs are missing the CD diagnose in some children with
atypical symptoms since the proportion of children typical symptoms is higher
than what has been shown in screening studies. Thus, I think that the FPs might
be overestimating their knowledge on CD, making the initiative by the authors to
educate and inform even more important. This could be put forward more clearly.
2. Results paragraph 7, please check the result given the relation between
knowledge and number of consultancies (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 0.9-5.2 p<0.0001 –
Table 7), since the CI suggests that the finding is non-significant but the given
p-value is very low.
3. Abbreviations are still not used consequently (for example CD is sometimes
written as celiac disease and sometimes CD, tTG, FP similarly).
4. In the abstract and then separately in the manuscript, make sure abbreviations
are written out the first time they appear.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:How well do Italian family paediatricians approach and manage celiac
disease? A cross-sectional study in Puglia Region, 2012
Version:3Date:6 January 2014
Reviewer: Anna Myleus
Reviewer's report:
1. Regarding the knowledge of CD among the FPs.
I agree with the authors that the knowledge of CD is self-reported (with the
inherent limitations of self-report) and the changes made to the manuscript
highlighting this are good. Still, I disagree with the authors regarding the
interpretation (Answer A1). Even if the study showed that the FPs were the first
to suspect CD in patients with atypical symptoms as well, I think the study
suggests that the FPs are missing the CD diagnose in some children with
atypical symptoms since the proportion of children typical symptoms is higher
than what has been shown in screening studies. Thus, I think that the FPs might
be overestimating their knowledge on CD, making the initiative by the authors to
educate and inform even more important. This could be put forward more clearly.
2. Results paragraph 7, please check the result given the relation between
knowledge and number of consultancies (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 0.9-5.2 p<0.0001 –
Table 7), since the CI suggests that the finding is non-significant but the given
p-value is very low.
3. Abbreviations are still not used consequently (for example CD is sometimes
written as celiac disease and sometimes CD, tTG, FP similarly).
4. In the abstract and then separately in the manuscript, make sure abbreviations
are written out the first time they appear.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:How well do Italian family paediatricians approach and manage celiac
disease? A cross-sectional study in Puglia Region, 2012
Version:3Date:6 January 2014
Reviewer: Anna Myleus
Reviewer's report:
1. Regarding the knowledge of CD among the FPs.
I agree with the authors that the knowledge of CD is self-reported (with the
inherent limitations of self-report) and the changes made to the manuscript
highlighting this are good. Still, I disagree with the authors regarding the
interpretation (Answer A1). Even if the study showed that the FPs were the first
to suspect CD in patients with atypical symptoms as well, I think the study
suggests that the FPs are missing the CD diagnose in some children with
atypical symptoms since the proportion of children typical symptoms is higher
than what has been shown in screening studies. Thus, I think that the FPs might
be overestimating their knowledge on CD, making the initiative by the authors to
educate and inform even more important. This could be put forward more clearly.
2. Results paragraph 7, please check the result given the relation between
knowledge and number of consultancies (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 0.9-5.2 p<0.0001 –
Table 7), since the CI suggests that the finding is non-significant but the given
p-value is very low.
3. Abbreviations are still not used consequently (for example CD is sometimes
written as celiac disease and sometimes CD, tTG, FP similarly).
4. In the abstract and then separately in the manuscript, make sure abbreviations
are written out the first time they appear.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant