Title: A validation Study of Three Early Warning Scores in Early Identification of Gastric
Cancer Patients with Deteriorating Condition after Gastrectomy
Version: 2 Date: 02 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Chikashi Shibata
Reviewer's report:
This study investigated postoperative complications in patients undergoing gastrectomy for
gastric cancer. The authors compared three scoring systems (MEWS, SEWS, NEWS) in terms
of model discrimination, model calibration, and decision curve analysis, and  found that SEWS
is the most recommended method.
I have following suggestions.
1. The authors need to state limitation of this study.
2. The conclusion at the end of the text is too long and too repetitious. It should be short.
Title: A validation Study of Three Early Warning Scores in Early Identification of Gastric
Cancer Patients with Deteriorating Condition after Gastrectomy
Version: 2 Date: 02 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Chikashi Shibata
Reviewer's report:
This study investigated postoperative complications in patients undergoing gastrectomy for
gastric cancer. The authors compared three scoring systems (MEWS, SEWS, NEWS) in terms
of model discrimination, model calibration, and decision curve analysis, and  found that SEWS
is the most recommended method.
I have following suggestions.
1. The authors need to state limitation of this study.
2. The conclusion at the end of the text is too long and too repetitious. It should be short.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A validation Study of Three Early Warning Scores in Early Identification of Gastric
Cancer Patients with Deteriorating Condition after Gastrectomy
Version: 2 Date: 02 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Chikashi Shibata
Reviewer's report:
This study investigated postoperative complications in patients undergoing gastrectomy for
gastric cancer. The authors compared three scoring systems (MEWS, SEWS, NEWS) in terms
of model discrimination, model calibration, and decision curve analysis, and  found that SEWS
is the most recommended method.
I have following suggestions.
1. The authors need to state limitation of this study.
2. The conclusion at the end of the text is too long and too repetitious. It should be short.
assistant