Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Colonic polyp histopathology and location in a community -based sample of older adults  
 
Version: 1 Date: 27 May 2016 
 
Reviewer:  Mala  Pande  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
Thank you for the opportunity to review the  revised manuscript.  
 
Review comments have been appropriately addressed in the manuscript.  
 
There are a few additional suggestions and minor edits:  
 
1. In the abstract (and Figure 3) the sentence "Comparisons of location by sex in each age group 
were signif icant" is not clear because there are multiple locations. Is the statistical comparison 
measuring differences by sex for each location within each age group? How is the statement of 
"significant" results to be interpreted? It may be more meaningful to desc ribe whether males or 
females have a preponderance for left or right sided pathology at different ages.  
 
2. Page 8, line 159, V in "villous" should not be capitalized.  
 
3. Page 9, line 164, Add Table 2 along with Figure 1 in brackets.  
 
4. Table 4: Not sure what "Adjusted" means. Are the sex specific estimates adjusted for age? Is 
so that should be mentioned as a note below the table. Adding another column to Table 4 
showing the number of single/multiple polyps for each age category would also add more clarit y 
to the table.  
 
5. In the concluding statement (line 241) the statement that sessile serrated adenomas are more 
common in middle -age adults is not supported by any text in the results section. A sentence 
should be added to the results pointing the reader to the appropriate table/figure.  
 
6. Figures 1 -3, the statement of "significant" results should be modified as it is not clear what the 
comparisons are. It may be simpler and more meaningful to provide an interpretation statement 
along with the significant  results.   
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, plea se 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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the dat a shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify 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, fees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 c ontent of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organiz ation 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 a ny 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.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will b e posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. 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/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published . 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Colonic polyp histopathology and location in a community -based sample of older adults  
 
Version: 1 Date: 27 May 2016 
 
Reviewer:  Mala  Pande  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
Thank you for the opportunity to review the  revised manuscript.  
 
Review comments have been appropriately addressed in the manuscript.  
 
There are a few additional suggestions and minor edits:  
 
1. In the abstract (and Figure 3) the sentence "Comparisons of location by sex in each age group 
were signif icant" is not clear because there are multiple locations. Is the statistical comparison 
measuring differences by sex for each location within each age group? How is the statement of 
"significant" results to be interpreted? It may be more meaningful to desc ribe whether males or 
females have a preponderance for left or right sided pathology at different ages.  
 
2. Page 8, line 159, V in "villous" should not be capitalized.  
 
3. Page 9, line 164, Add Table 2 along with Figure 1 in brackets.  
 
4. Table 4: Not sure what "Adjusted" means. Are the sex specific estimates adjusted for age? Is 
so that should be mentioned as a note below the table. Adding another column to Table 4 
showing the number of single/multiple polyps for each age category would also add more clarit y 
to the table.  
 
5. In the concluding statement (line 241) the statement that sessile serrated adenomas are more 
common in middle -age adults is not supported by any text in the results section. A sentence 
should be added to the results pointing the reader to the appropriate table/figure.  
 
6. Figures 1 -3, the statement of "significant" results should be modified as it is not clear what the 
comparisons are. It may be simpler and more meaningful to provide an interpretation statement 
along with the significant  results.   
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, plea se 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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the dat a shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify 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, fees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 c ontent of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organiz ation 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 a ny 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.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will b e posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. 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/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published . 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Colonic polyp histopathology and location in a community -based sample of older adults  
 
Version: 1 Date: 27 May 2016 
 
Reviewer:  Mala  Pande  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
Thank you for the opportunity to review the  revised manuscript.  
 
Review comments have been appropriately addressed in the manuscript.  
 
There are a few additional suggestions and minor edits:  
 
1. In the abstract (and Figure 3) the sentence "Comparisons of location by sex in each age group 
were signif icant" is not clear because there are multiple locations. Is the statistical comparison 
measuring differences by sex for each location within each age group? How is the statement of 
"significant" results to be interpreted? It may be more meaningful to desc ribe whether males or 
females have a preponderance for left or right sided pathology at different ages.  
 
2. Page 8, line 159, V in "villous" should not be capitalized.  
 
3. Page 9, line 164, Add Table 2 along with Figure 1 in brackets.  
 
4. Table 4: Not sure what "Adjusted" means. Are the sex specific estimates adjusted for age? Is 
so that should be mentioned as a note below the table. Adding another column to Table 4 
showing the number of single/multiple polyps for each age category would also add more clarit y 
to the table.  
 
5. In the concluding statement (line 241) the statement that sessile serrated adenomas are more 
common in middle -age adults is not supported by any text in the results section. A sentence 
should be added to the results pointing the reader to the appropriate table/figure.  
 
6. Figures 1 -3, the statement of "significant" results should be modified as it is not clear what the 
comparisons are. It may be simpler and more meaningful to provide an interpretation statement 
along with the significant  results.   
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, plea se 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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the dat a shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify 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, fees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 c ontent of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organiz ation 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 a ny 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.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will b e posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. 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/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published . 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant