Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  An Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Constipat ion:a Right Attitude Towards to 
Guidelines  
 
Version:  1 Date:  27 Sep 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Uday  Ghoshal  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The paper has been revised quite well. However, some more revisions are needed a s mentioned 
below.  
1. Under "Characteristics of guidelines", authors write "............and the remaining five were 
from Asia (China, Korea, Indonesia),  respectively (Table 1)" - this may be misunderstood 
by the readers. It look like all the Asian guideline s are made in three countries, namely 
China, Korea and Indonesia. This is not correct. For example, the ANMA constipation 
management tool was multinational involving several countries in Asia. Hence, it is better to 
write "............and the remaining fiv e were from Asia (two from China, one from Korea, one 
from Indonesia and one multi -national),  respectively (Table 1)"  
 
2. Several statements are not accompanied by appropriate references. For example, "Only one 
guideline addressed patients' views and prefer ences during the development process." - 
should be accompanied by appropriate reference so that the reader can make out which 
guideline is being referred to. In fact, this is just an example. Several such statements need 
references.  
 
3. Authors reviewed co nstipation guidelines published long before AGREEII was developed. 
Hence, the authors making constipation guidelines did not have access to AGREEII to 
comply with it. Therefore, non -compliance to AGREEII is not intentional. This should be 
mentioned in the Discussion.  
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the aut hors.  
Unable to assess  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I am able to assess the statistics  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscri pt: 
Acceptable  
Declaration of competing interests  
Please c omplete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication o f this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently ap plying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
None  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  An Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Constipat ion:a Right Attitude Towards to 
Guidelines  
 
Version:  1 Date:  27 Sep 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Uday  Ghoshal  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The paper has been revised quite well. However, some more revisions are needed a s mentioned 
below.  
1. Under "Characteristics of guidelines", authors write "............and the remaining five were 
from Asia (China, Korea, Indonesia),  respectively (Table 1)" - this may be misunderstood 
by the readers. It look like all the Asian guideline s are made in three countries, namely 
China, Korea and Indonesia. This is not correct. For example, the ANMA constipation 
management tool was multinational involving several countries in Asia. Hence, it is better to 
write "............and the remaining fiv e were from Asia (two from China, one from Korea, one 
from Indonesia and one multi -national),  respectively (Table 1)"  
 
2. Several statements are not accompanied by appropriate references. For example, "Only one 
guideline addressed patients' views and prefer ences during the development process." - 
should be accompanied by appropriate reference so that the reader can make out which 
guideline is being referred to. In fact, this is just an example. Several such statements need 
references.  
 
3. Authors reviewed co nstipation guidelines published long before AGREEII was developed. 
Hence, the authors making constipation guidelines did not have access to AGREEII to 
comply with it. Therefore, non -compliance to AGREEII is not intentional. This should be 
mentioned in the Discussion.  
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the aut hors.  
Unable to assess  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I am able to assess the statistics  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscri pt: 
Acceptable  
Declaration of competing interests  
Please c omplete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication o f this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently ap plying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
None  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  An Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Constipat ion:a Right Attitude Towards to 
Guidelines  
 
Version:  1 Date:  27 Sep 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Uday  Ghoshal  
 
Reviewer's report:  
The paper has been revised quite well. However, some more revisions are needed a s mentioned 
below.  
1. Under "Characteristics of guidelines", authors write "............and the remaining five were 
from Asia (China, Korea, Indonesia),  respectively (Table 1)" - this may be misunderstood 
by the readers. It look like all the Asian guideline s are made in three countries, namely 
China, Korea and Indonesia. This is not correct. For example, the ANMA constipation 
management tool was multinational involving several countries in Asia. Hence, it is better to 
write "............and the remaining fiv e were from Asia (two from China, one from Korea, one 
from Indonesia and one multi -national),  respectively (Table 1)"  
 
2. Several statements are not accompanied by appropriate references. For example, "Only one 
guideline addressed patients' views and prefer ences during the development process." - 
should be accompanied by appropriate reference so that the reader can make out which 
guideline is being referred to. In fact, this is just an example. Several such statements need 
references.  
 
3. Authors reviewed co nstipation guidelines published long before AGREEII was developed. 
Hence, the authors making constipation guidelines did not have access to AGREEII to 
comply with it. Therefore, non -compliance to AGREEII is not intentional. This should be 
mentioned in the Discussion.  
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the aut hors.  
Unable to assess  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I am able to assess the statistics  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscri pt: 
Acceptable  
Declaration of competing interests  
Please c omplete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication o f this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently ap plying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
None  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant