Title: "Evaluation of Hepatobiliary Disorders Using Magnetic Resonance
Cholangiopancreatography in a Low-Resource Setting in Kano,Nigeria: A Retrospective Study"
Version: 2 Date: 24 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
• Please define abbreviations upon their first use (e.g., MPD, AKTH) in the abstract.
• The diagnostic value of MRCP in hepatobiliary pathology is well-established in existing
literature. What additional insights does this study provide?
• Kindly remove the subheadings in the Materials and Methods section.
• Please include the exclusion criteria for the study.
• Who was responsible for analyzing the images for the presence of pancreatic mass,
cholangiocarcinoma, and hepatic mass? What was the interobserver agreement?
• What potential biases were present in the study, and how were they addressed?
• In the Results section, the same information is presented both in text and table format. Please
revise to avoid repetition.
• Reduce the number of images; only include a few representative ones.
• Please make the Results section more concise, focusing on the most relevant information.
• Please revise the Conclusion to be more concise, summarizing only the key findings of the
manuscript. Avoid restating the results.
Title: "Evaluation of Hepatobiliary Disorders Using Magnetic Resonance
Cholangiopancreatography in a Low-Resource Setting in Kano,Nigeria: A Retrospective Study"
Version: 2 Date: 24 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
• Please define abbreviations upon their first use (e.g., MPD, AKTH) in the abstract.
• The diagnostic value of MRCP in hepatobiliary pathology is well-established in existing
literature. What additional insights does this study provide?
• Kindly remove the subheadings in the Materials and Methods section.
• Please include the exclusion criteria for the study.
• Who was responsible for analyzing the images for the presence of pancreatic mass,
cholangiocarcinoma, and hepatic mass? What was the interobserver agreement?
• What potential biases were present in the study, and how were they addressed?
• In the Results section, the same information is presented both in text and table format. Please
revise to avoid repetition.
• Reduce the number of images; only include a few representative ones.
• Please make the Results section more concise, focusing on the most relevant information.
• Please revise the Conclusion to be more concise, summarizing only the key findings of the
manuscript. Avoid restating the results.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: "Evaluation of Hepatobiliary Disorders Using Magnetic Resonance
Cholangiopancreatography in a Low-Resource Setting in Kano,Nigeria: A Retrospective Study"
Version: 2 Date: 24 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
• Please define abbreviations upon their first use (e.g., MPD, AKTH) in the abstract.
• The diagnostic value of MRCP in hepatobiliary pathology is well-established in existing
literature. What additional insights does this study provide?
• Kindly remove the subheadings in the Materials and Methods section.
• Please include the exclusion criteria for the study.
• Who was responsible for analyzing the images for the presence of pancreatic mass,
cholangiocarcinoma, and hepatic mass? What was the interobserver agreement?
• What potential biases were present in the study, and how were they addressed?
• In the Results section, the same information is presented both in text and table format. Please
revise to avoid repetition.
• Reduce the number of images; only include a few representative ones.
• Please make the Results section more concise, focusing on the most relevant information.
• Please revise the Conclusion to be more concise, summarizing only the key findings of the
manuscript. Avoid restating the results.
assistant