Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 4 Date: 25 Nov 2023
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: The authors answered the reviewers' comments and questions point
by point, corrected and thus improved the manuscript.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Although the authors answered the questions point by point and made changes in the manuscript,
the lines in which the changes were made are not correct, and the marked text does not include
all the changes, which made it difficult to follow and flow the answers.
Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 4 Date: 25 Nov 2023
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: The authors answered the reviewers' comments and questions point
by point, corrected and thus improved the manuscript.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Although the authors answered the questions point by point and made changes in the manuscript,
the lines in which the changes were made are not correct, and the marked text does not include
all the changes, which made it difficult to follow and flow the answers.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Dietary and Lifestyle Indices for Hyperinsulinemia and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Case-
Control Study
Version: 4 Date: 25 Nov 2023
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: The authors answered the reviewers' comments and questions point
by point, corrected and thus improved the manuscript.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Although the authors answered the questions point by point and made changes in the manuscript,
the lines in which the changes were made are not correct, and the marked text does not include
all the changes, which made it difficult to follow and flow the answers.
assistant