Title: Supplemental bifid triple viable capsule treatment improves inflammatory response and
T cell frequency in ulcerative colitis patients
Version: 2 Date: 23 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Although the authors have met many of the concerns raised during the review I am not able to
accept this manuscript. My primary major comment, where I asked the authors to compare the
changes between baseline and end of treatment for the two treatment groups, has not at all been
addressed. Unfortunately, none of the tables have been changed in relation to this. In addition
to this, many parts of the sections in the introduction and discussion are missing references,
meaning that statements are being made with no background. Even though the discussion has
improved, it is still not acceptable in its present form. Finally, as stated by reviewer no 1, the
English is too poor.
Title: Supplemental bifid triple viable capsule treatment improves inflammatory response and
T cell frequency in ulcerative colitis patients
Version: 2 Date: 23 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Although the authors have met many of the concerns raised during the review I am not able to
accept this manuscript. My primary major comment, where I asked the authors to compare the
changes between baseline and end of treatment for the two treatment groups, has not at all been
addressed. Unfortunately, none of the tables have been changed in relation to this. In addition
to this, many parts of the sections in the introduction and discussion are missing references,
meaning that statements are being made with no background. Even though the discussion has
improved, it is still not acceptable in its present form. Finally, as stated by reviewer no 1, the
English is too poor.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Supplemental bifid triple viable capsule treatment improves inflammatory response and
T cell frequency in ulcerative colitis patients
Version: 2 Date: 23 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Although the authors have met many of the concerns raised during the review I am not able to
accept this manuscript. My primary major comment, where I asked the authors to compare the
changes between baseline and end of treatment for the two treatment groups, has not at all been
addressed. Unfortunately, none of the tables have been changed in relation to this. In addition
to this, many parts of the sections in the introduction and discussion are missing references,
meaning that statements are being made with no background. Even though the discussion has
improved, it is still not acceptable in its present form. Finally, as stated by reviewer no 1, the
English is too poor.
assistant