Title: Effectiveness of eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A
systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 22 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Bahman Razi
Reviewer's report:
Fekadu et al. performed a systematic review entitled “Effectiveness of eradication therapy for
Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis”. I reviewed the
manuscript carefully and find some shortages which should be amended.
*The authors reported their funding in the abstract without p-value. It is a common scientific
mistake. All over the text amend this point.
* The abstract is too long and there are several unnecessary sentences. Please rewrote the
abstract.
* As you know the regimen for eradication therapy consist of different antibiotic. In your
manuscript all included studies used the same regimen?
*As the author reported a new network meta-analysis published in 2022 entitled “Worldwide and
Regional Efficacy Estimates of First-line Helicobacter pylori Treatments: A Systematic Review
and Network Meta-Analysis” the clearly and with details discussed about kind of regimen and
all other point. What is the priority of your work?
* What the authors mean from this sentence? “The African studies differ in study settings,
methodology, and other characteristics” what is the point of difference??
* The authors reported the results of a strong network meta-analysis (which included African
studies). However, in the next line said “there is no pooled eradication rate consisting of
observational and randomized controlled trials for H. pylori infection in Africa”. As you know
the network meta-analysis are more reliable studies than systematic review ana meta-analysis.
* There is no need to include details of search strategy in main text. Present as supplementary
file.
* Order studies in table 2 based on publication year.
*According to the  table 2 different studies used different regimen. How do you pool them in
overall analysis and subgroups? This could be correct while a standard protocol confirms that
for example: OAC regimen with defined dosage and duration time is similar to OAM regimen
with defined dosage and duration time. Otherwise, analysis of them is not correct from statistical
perspective.
*The results of subgroup analysis in type of regimen are ambiguous.
*Discussion is incomplete.
Title: Effectiveness of eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A
systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 22 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Bahman Razi
Reviewer's report:
Fekadu et al. performed a systematic review entitled “Effectiveness of eradication therapy for
Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis”. I reviewed the
manuscript carefully and find some shortages which should be amended.
*The authors reported their funding in the abstract without p-value. It is a common scientific
mistake. All over the text amend this point.
* The abstract is too long and there are several unnecessary sentences. Please rewrote the
abstract.
* As you know the regimen for eradication therapy consist of different antibiotic. In your
manuscript all included studies used the same regimen?
*As the author reported a new network meta-analysis published in 2022 entitled “Worldwide and
Regional Efficacy Estimates of First-line Helicobacter pylori Treatments: A Systematic Review
and Network Meta-Analysis” the clearly and with details discussed about kind of regimen and
all other point. What is the priority of your work?
* What the authors mean from this sentence? “The African studies differ in study settings,
methodology, and other characteristics” what is the point of difference??
* The authors reported the results of a strong network meta-analysis (which included African
studies). However, in the next line said “there is no pooled eradication rate consisting of
observational and randomized controlled trials for H. pylori infection in Africa”. As you know
the network meta-analysis are more reliable studies than systematic review ana meta-analysis.
* There is no need to include details of search strategy in main text. Present as supplementary
file.
* Order studies in table 2 based on publication year.
*According to the  table 2 different studies used different regimen. How do you pool them in
overall analysis and subgroups? This could be correct while a standard protocol confirms that
for example: OAC regimen with defined dosage and duration time is similar to OAM regimen
with defined dosage and duration time. Otherwise, analysis of them is not correct from statistical
perspective.
*The results of subgroup analysis in type of regimen are ambiguous.
*Discussion is incomplete.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Effectiveness of eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A
systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 22 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Bahman Razi
Reviewer's report:
Fekadu et al. performed a systematic review entitled “Effectiveness of eradication therapy for
Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis”. I reviewed the
manuscript carefully and find some shortages which should be amended.
*The authors reported their funding in the abstract without p-value. It is a common scientific
mistake. All over the text amend this point.
* The abstract is too long and there are several unnecessary sentences. Please rewrote the
abstract.
* As you know the regimen for eradication therapy consist of different antibiotic. In your
manuscript all included studies used the same regimen?
*As the author reported a new network meta-analysis published in 2022 entitled “Worldwide and
Regional Efficacy Estimates of First-line Helicobacter pylori Treatments: A Systematic Review
and Network Meta-Analysis” the clearly and with details discussed about kind of regimen and
all other point. What is the priority of your work?
* What the authors mean from this sentence? “The African studies differ in study settings,
methodology, and other characteristics” what is the point of difference??
* The authors reported the results of a strong network meta-analysis (which included African
studies). However, in the next line said “there is no pooled eradication rate consisting of
observational and randomized controlled trials for H. pylori infection in Africa”. As you know
the network meta-analysis are more reliable studies than systematic review ana meta-analysis.
* There is no need to include details of search strategy in main text. Present as supplementary
file.
* Order studies in table 2 based on publication year.
*According to the  table 2 different studies used different regimen. How do you pool them in
overall analysis and subgroups? This could be correct while a standard protocol confirms that
for example: OAC regimen with defined dosage and duration time is similar to OAM regimen
with defined dosage and duration time. Otherwise, analysis of them is not correct from statistical
perspective.
*The results of subgroup analysis in type of regimen are ambiguous.
*Discussion is incomplete.
assistant