Title: The associations between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive
Mendelian randomization study
Version: 2 Date: 20 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is the repeat review of the manuscript titled "The associations
between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive Mendelian randomization
study". Authors performed an MR study, in which effects of the genetic predisposition to the
presence or magnitude of many clinical risk factors on the trait of constipation were analyzed.
After two revisions, this MS got a complete makeover, and now is ready for publishing.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All good now. Authors: congratulation on a great job!
Title: The associations between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive
Mendelian randomization study
Version: 2 Date: 20 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is the repeat review of the manuscript titled "The associations
between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive Mendelian randomization
study". Authors performed an MR study, in which effects of the genetic predisposition to the
presence or magnitude of many clinical risk factors on the trait of constipation were analyzed.
After two revisions, this MS got a complete makeover, and now is ready for publishing.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All good now. Authors: congratulation on a great job!
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The associations between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive
Mendelian randomization study
Version: 2 Date: 20 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is the repeat review of the manuscript titled "The associations
between modifiable risk factors and constipation: A comprehensive Mendelian randomization
study". Authors performed an MR study, in which effects of the genetic predisposition to the
presence or magnitude of many clinical risk factors on the trait of constipation were analyzed.
After two revisions, this MS got a complete makeover, and now is ready for publishing.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All good now. Authors: congratulation on a great job!
assistant