Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Bile cholesterol and viscosity, the keys to discriminating adenomatous polyps from  
cholesterol polyps by a novel predictive scoring model.  
 
Version: 1 Date: 21 Jul 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESS MENTS:  
 
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 approac h (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 reason able 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 tec hnically sound  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have answered the questions of the reviewer and modified 
the manuscript according to the suggestions provided. In particular, they reviewed their use of 
statistical tests, and performe d extra analyses (Kolmogorov -Smirnov test and the non -parametric 
Mann -Whitney U when needed) to prove the normality of the data (which conditioned the results 
shown). The new results were incorporated in the revised manuscript text and in Table 1. Overall,  
the current version has been thus improved.  
 
 
 
 
Publons Reviewer Recognition . Springer Nature can send verifica tion of this review directly to 
Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, 
please click on the “Yes” option below. Your name, email  address, title of the reviewed manuscript, 
name of the journal, and date of your review submission (the “Review Data ”) will then be 
transmitted to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already regi stered at 
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile as per your 
settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons,  you will receive an email from 
them asking you to register in order for them to be able to re cognize your review on your new 
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivat ive metadata for the benefit of 
Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensi tivity of such information. For 
example, Publons may ve rify your record as a reviewer by updatin g your profile published on its 
webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors t o identify candidate reviewers. 
Please find the details of processing in Publons ’ privacy policy https://publons.co m/about/terms  
 
No 
 
Are the methods app ropriate 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 authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusi ons 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 manus cript or would you recommend an additional 
statistical review?  
If an additional sta tistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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 manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete 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 financial ly from the publication of 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 applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing i nterests are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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 ) if t his 
manuscript is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the 
published report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be 
published.  If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the edi torial office 
before completing the review.  If you wish, you can include your name in your publish ed report. 
Please note you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm 
this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish 
your name.  
 
I agree to the terms of the CC -BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.  
(default)  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Bile cholesterol and viscosity, the keys to discriminating adenomatous polyps from  
cholesterol polyps by a novel predictive scoring model.  
 
Version: 1 Date: 21 Jul 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESS MENTS:  
 
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 approac h (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 reason able 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 tec hnically sound  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have answered the questions of the reviewer and modified 
the manuscript according to the suggestions provided. In particular, they reviewed their use of 
statistical tests, and performe d extra analyses (Kolmogorov -Smirnov test and the non -parametric 
Mann -Whitney U when needed) to prove the normality of the data (which conditioned the results 
shown). The new results were incorporated in the revised manuscript text and in Table 1. Overall,  
the current version has been thus improved.  
 
 
 
 
Publons Reviewer Recognition . Springer Nature can send verifica tion of this review directly to 
Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, 
please click on the “Yes” option below. Your name, email  address, title of the reviewed manuscript, 
name of the journal, and date of your review submission (the “Review Data ”) will then be 
transmitted to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already regi stered at 
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile as per your 
settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons,  you will receive an email from 
them asking you to register in order for them to be able to re cognize your review on your new 
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivat ive metadata for the benefit of 
Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensi tivity of such information. For 
example, Publons may ve rify your record as a reviewer by updatin g your profile published on its 
webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors t o identify candidate reviewers. 
Please find the details of processing in Publons ’ privacy policy https://publons.co m/about/terms  
 
No 
 
Are the methods app ropriate 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 authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusi ons 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 manus cript or would you recommend an additional 
statistical review?  
If an additional sta tistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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 manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete 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 financial ly from the publication of 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 applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing i nterests are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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 ) if t his 
manuscript is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the 
published report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be 
published.  If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the edi torial office 
before completing the review.  If you wish, you can include your name in your publish ed report. 
Please note you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm 
this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish 
your name.  
 
I agree to the terms of the CC -BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.  
(default)  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Bile cholesterol and viscosity, the keys to discriminating adenomatous polyps from  
cholesterol polyps by a novel predictive scoring model.  
 
Version: 1 Date: 21 Jul 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESS MENTS:  
 
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 approac h (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 reason able 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 tec hnically sound  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have answered the questions of the reviewer and modified 
the manuscript according to the suggestions provided. In particular, they reviewed their use of 
statistical tests, and performe d extra analyses (Kolmogorov -Smirnov test and the non -parametric 
Mann -Whitney U when needed) to prove the normality of the data (which conditioned the results 
shown). The new results were incorporated in the revised manuscript text and in Table 1. Overall,  
the current version has been thus improved.  
 
 
 
 
Publons Reviewer Recognition . Springer Nature can send verifica tion of this review directly to 
Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, 
please click on the “Yes” option below. Your name, email  address, title of the reviewed manuscript, 
name of the journal, and date of your review submission (the “Review Data ”) will then be 
transmitted to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already regi stered at 
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile as per your 
settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons,  you will receive an email from 
them asking you to register in order for them to be able to re cognize your review on your new 
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivat ive metadata for the benefit of 
Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensi tivity of such information. For 
example, Publons may ve rify your record as a reviewer by updatin g your profile published on its 
webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors t o identify candidate reviewers. 
Please find the details of processing in Publons ’ privacy policy https://publons.co m/about/terms  
 
No 
 
Are the methods app ropriate 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 authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusi ons 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 manus cript or would you recommend an additional 
statistical review?  
If an additional sta tistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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 manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete 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 financial ly from the publication of 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 applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing i nterests are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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 ) if t his 
manuscript is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the 
published report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be 
published.  If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the edi torial office 
before completing the review.  If you wish, you can include your name in your publish ed report. 
Please note you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm 
this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish 
your name.  
 
I agree to the terms of the CC -BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.  
(default)  
assistant