Title: Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment of intra-abdominal traumatic
neuromas - a narrative review
Version: 0 Date: 17 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with 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?
N/A - there are no statistics in this study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I read with interest the manuscript by Wang, et al. The authors
discussed regarding epidemiology, pathophysiology, mechanism, risk factors, classification,
diagnosis, and management of intra-abdominal traumatic neuroma. I have the following
comments:
1. This article looks more like a simple review. The authors should make this clearer in their
title, so readers are aware.
2. The authors did not comment if a biopsy is needed, or imaging characteristics are sufficient
for making a diagnosis.
3. Suggest making a table for imaging characteristics noted for TN.
4. It would be extremely helpful for readers if authors can make an algorithm/flow chart that
would include diagnostic and management options.
5. The authors should get their manuscript checked for grammatical errors by someone that is
proficient in English.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Comments posted for authors above. Please revise accordingly.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Please see above comments and consider revising."
Title: Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment of intra-abdominal traumatic
neuromas - a narrative review
Version: 0 Date: 17 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with 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?
N/A - there are no statistics in this study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I read with interest the manuscript by Wang, et al. The authors
discussed regarding epidemiology, pathophysiology, mechanism, risk factors, classification,
diagnosis, and management of intra-abdominal traumatic neuroma. I have the following
comments:
1. This article looks more like a simple review. The authors should make this clearer in their
title, so readers are aware.
2. The authors did not comment if a biopsy is needed, or imaging characteristics are sufficient
for making a diagnosis.
3. Suggest making a table for imaging characteristics noted for TN.
4. It would be extremely helpful for readers if authors can make an algorithm/flow chart that
would include diagnostic and management options.
5. The authors should get their manuscript checked for grammatical errors by someone that is
proficient in English.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Comments posted for authors above. Please revise accordingly.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Please see above comments and consider revising."
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment of intra-abdominal traumatic
neuromas - a narrative review
Version: 0 Date: 17 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with 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?
N/A - there are no statistics in this study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I read with interest the manuscript by Wang, et al. The authors
discussed regarding epidemiology, pathophysiology, mechanism, risk factors, classification,
diagnosis, and management of intra-abdominal traumatic neuroma. I have the following
comments:
1. This article looks more like a simple review. The authors should make this clearer in their
title, so readers are aware.
2. The authors did not comment if a biopsy is needed, or imaging characteristics are sufficient
for making a diagnosis.
3. Suggest making a table for imaging characteristics noted for TN.
4. It would be extremely helpful for readers if authors can make an algorithm/flow chart that
would include diagnostic and management options.
5. The authors should get their manuscript checked for grammatical errors by someone that is
proficient in English.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Comments posted for authors above. Please revise accordingly.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Please see above comments and consider revising."
assistant