Reviewer's report
Title:Seasonal pattern of peptic ulcer hospitalizations: analysis of the hospital
discharge data of the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy.
Version: 3Date:16 February 2010
Reviewer: Reimar W Thomsen
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the revised paper. The authors
have been compliant with suggestions and I feel the manuscript has improved
considerably, in particular by making more clear the two different approaches of
analysizing total number of hospital admission vs. proportion of admissions.
I was asked by the editor to comment on the question of using a lower p-value
cut-off than <0.05 because of many comparisons made. In my opinion, nothing is
gained by converting the continous p value measure into a qualitative dichotomy
of 'significant' or 'non-significant', may it be <0.05 or <0.001. I would rather see
the actual numerical p values, as they are displayed by the authors, and judge for
myself, having in mind the number of associations tested and the inborn risk that
some associations may have arisen by chance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Seasonal pattern of peptic ulcer hospitalizations: analysis of the hospital
discharge data of the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy.
Version: 3Date:16 February 2010
Reviewer: Reimar W Thomsen
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the revised paper. The authors
have been compliant with suggestions and I feel the manuscript has improved
considerably, in particular by making more clear the two different approaches of
analysizing total number of hospital admission vs. proportion of admissions.
I was asked by the editor to comment on the question of using a lower p-value
cut-off than <0.05 because of many comparisons made. In my opinion, nothing is
gained by converting the continous p value measure into a qualitative dichotomy
of 'significant' or 'non-significant', may it be <0.05 or <0.001. I would rather see
the actual numerical p values, as they are displayed by the authors, and judge for
myself, having in mind the number of associations tested and the inborn risk that
some associations may have arisen by chance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Seasonal pattern of peptic ulcer hospitalizations: analysis of the hospital
discharge data of the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy.
Version: 3Date:16 February 2010
Reviewer: Reimar W Thomsen
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the revised paper. The authors
have been compliant with suggestions and I feel the manuscript has improved
considerably, in particular by making more clear the two different approaches of
analysizing total number of hospital admission vs. proportion of admissions.
I was asked by the editor to comment on the question of using a lower p-value
cut-off than <0.05 because of many comparisons made. In my opinion, nothing is
gained by converting the continous p value measure into a qualitative dichotomy
of 'significant' or 'non-significant', may it be <0.05 or <0.001. I would rather see
the actual numerical p values, as they are displayed by the authors, and judge for
myself, having in mind the number of associations tested and the inborn risk that
some associations may have arisen by chance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant