Reviewer's report
Title:Studies on a possible role of Escherichia coli in propagation and
perpetuation of the gut chronic inflamation in ulcerative colitis.
Version: 1Date:13 November 2012
Reviewer: Georgina L Hold
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
1) Abstract background is inappropriate providing no background information
2) Whole manuscript needs checking for spelling errors and proof reader input
recommended. Scientific meaning of certain statements is lacking/lost - example
is description of biopsy sampling from patients (abstract methods).
3) Was unchanged tissue sample collection from the same patients as the
inflamed tissue.
4) in the abstract it is unclear what was the status of the controls
5) Control group is not a suitable control group consideration should be given to
selecting a more appropriate control group.
6) Need histological confirmation of normal mucosa in both UC and IBS controls
7) Information on UC treatment regimens is essential.
8) How long were biopsies frozen for – was it consistent
9) Methods data is insufficient to understand what has been done. For example
DNA extraction and PCR strategies alongwith quantification approaches. It is not
possible to understand what has been done.
Minor Essential Revisions
1) E. coli not E.coli (include a space)
2) Change the ‘,’ in p values to ‘.’
3) Always italicise E. coli
4) Change flora to microbiota
5) Reference statement lines 65-67
6) Consistently use abbreviations – sometimes E. coli, other times full name is
used.
7) Lines 209-212 – description of E. coli isolation locations is inadequate
8) Q-PCR and culture data highly different in bacterial numbers - provide
explanation
9) How can you effectively generate a global cfu count based on methodology
used?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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:Studies on a possible role of Escherichia coli in propagation and
perpetuation of the gut chronic inflamation in ulcerative colitis.
Version: 1Date:13 November 2012
Reviewer: Georgina L Hold
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
1) Abstract background is inappropriate providing no background information
2) Whole manuscript needs checking for spelling errors and proof reader input
recommended. Scientific meaning of certain statements is lacking/lost - example
is description of biopsy sampling from patients (abstract methods).
3) Was unchanged tissue sample collection from the same patients as the
inflamed tissue.
4) in the abstract it is unclear what was the status of the controls
5) Control group is not a suitable control group consideration should be given to
selecting a more appropriate control group.
6) Need histological confirmation of normal mucosa in both UC and IBS controls
7) Information on UC treatment regimens is essential.
8) How long were biopsies frozen for – was it consistent
9) Methods data is insufficient to understand what has been done. For example
DNA extraction and PCR strategies alongwith quantification approaches. It is not
possible to understand what has been done.
Minor Essential Revisions
1) E. coli not E.coli (include a space)
2) Change the ‘,’ in p values to ‘.’
3) Always italicise E. coli
4) Change flora to microbiota
5) Reference statement lines 65-67
6) Consistently use abbreviations – sometimes E. coli, other times full name is
used.
7) Lines 209-212 – description of E. coli isolation locations is inadequate
8) Q-PCR and culture data highly different in bacterial numbers - provide
explanation
9) How can you effectively generate a global cfu count based on methodology
used?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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:Studies on a possible role of Escherichia coli in propagation and
perpetuation of the gut chronic inflamation in ulcerative colitis.
Version: 1Date:13 November 2012
Reviewer: Georgina L Hold
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
1) Abstract background is inappropriate providing no background information
2) Whole manuscript needs checking for spelling errors and proof reader input
recommended. Scientific meaning of certain statements is lacking/lost - example
is description of biopsy sampling from patients (abstract methods).
3) Was unchanged tissue sample collection from the same patients as the
inflamed tissue.
4) in the abstract it is unclear what was the status of the controls
5) Control group is not a suitable control group consideration should be given to
selecting a more appropriate control group.
6) Need histological confirmation of normal mucosa in both UC and IBS controls
7) Information on UC treatment regimens is essential.
8) How long were biopsies frozen for – was it consistent
9) Methods data is insufficient to understand what has been done. For example
DNA extraction and PCR strategies alongwith quantification approaches. It is not
possible to understand what has been done.
Minor Essential Revisions
1) E. coli not E.coli (include a space)
2) Change the ‘,’ in p values to ‘.’
3) Always italicise E. coli
4) Change flora to microbiota
5) Reference statement lines 65-67
6) Consistently use abbreviations – sometimes E. coli, other times full name is
used.
7) Lines 209-212 – description of E. coli isolation locations is inadequate
8) Q-PCR and culture data highly different in bacterial numbers - provide
explanation
9) How can you effectively generate a global cfu count based on methodology
used?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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