Reviewer's report
Title:Applicability of a short/rapid 13C-urea breath test for Helicobacter pylori: a
retrospective multicenter chart review study
Version: 1Date:28 June 2011
Reviewer: Luigi Gatta
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the duration of the time needed for
diagnosing Helicobacter pylori by the BreathID system.
The main drawback of this study was the lacking of a gold standard to evaluate
the performance of the BreathID system: the same device tested is used as gold
standard to diagnose the infection. Unfortunately this is a retrospective study,
and therefore It is not clear if this bias can be removed.
It would be worth also discussing more in detail the "test duration" and the "test
duration until diagnosis". Why did the test take on average 12.97 min. to be
performed in Italy and 15.10 in Germany? Was this due to difference of the
patients (e.g. PUD vs. NUD patients)?
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Applicability of a short/rapid 13C-urea breath test for Helicobacter pylori: a
retrospective multicenter chart review study
Version: 1Date:28 June 2011
Reviewer: Luigi Gatta
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the duration of the time needed for
diagnosing Helicobacter pylori by the BreathID system.
The main drawback of this study was the lacking of a gold standard to evaluate
the performance of the BreathID system: the same device tested is used as gold
standard to diagnose the infection. Unfortunately this is a retrospective study,
and therefore It is not clear if this bias can be removed.
It would be worth also discussing more in detail the "test duration" and the "test
duration until diagnosis". Why did the test take on average 12.97 min. to be
performed in Italy and 15.10 in Germany? Was this due to difference of the
patients (e.g. PUD vs. NUD patients)?
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Applicability of a short/rapid 13C-urea breath test for Helicobacter pylori: a
retrospective multicenter chart review study
Version: 1Date:28 June 2011
Reviewer: Luigi Gatta
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the duration of the time needed for
diagnosing Helicobacter pylori by the BreathID system.
The main drawback of this study was the lacking of a gold standard to evaluate
the performance of the BreathID system: the same device tested is used as gold
standard to diagnose the infection. Unfortunately this is a retrospective study,
and therefore It is not clear if this bias can be removed.
It would be worth also discussing more in detail the "test duration" and the "test
duration until diagnosis". Why did the test take on average 12.97 min. to be
performed in Italy and 15.10 in Germany? Was this due to difference of the
patients (e.g. PUD vs. NUD patients)?
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant