Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Small intestinal microbiota composition and the prog nosis of infants with ileostomy 
resulting from distinct primary diseases  
 
Version: 3 Date: 03 Jun 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this manuscript, Qian et al. characterized the intestinal microbiota of neonates with ileostomy 
resulting from three different primary diseases. This study is very meaningful. But I think the 
statistical analyses within the manuscript need to be improved. Some major comments are as 
follows:  
 
1. Line  90-91: "the NCBI Sequence Read Archive  under accession number PRJNA553095". 
PRJNA553095 is not the accession number of the NCBI Sequence Read Archive. In addition, I 
can't find information about this accession number on NCBI. Please check this information.  
 
2. Figure  1B: It is recommended to add  an error bar, which helps to interpret the data better.  
 
3. Figure  2: the composition of microbiota within each group varied greatly, which affected the 
reliability of the results.  
 
4. Line  146: "the incidence of colitis and sepsis…" and "the increase in body  weight of the 
breastfeeding group was higher than in the non -breast -feeding group". According to the results 
of T-Test and Chi -square test, there was no significance. The difference may cause by the limited 
sample size. So, the conclusion that "breastfeed ing is likely to play a crucial role in …" is less 
reliable.  
 
5. This  article attempted to show that the different etiologies had dissimilar microbial community 
characteristics, but the differences among the groups were less analyzed in the results and 
discussion section.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well desc ribed?  
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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical 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 manuscr ipt: 
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 n ow 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 received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating t o 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 int erests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare tha t I have no competing interests  
 
 
 
 
 
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 this 
manuscri pt 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 cha nge 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: Small intestinal microbiota composition and the prog nosis of infants with ileostomy 
resulting from distinct primary diseases  
 
Version: 3 Date: 03 Jun 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this manuscript, Qian et al. characterized the intestinal microbiota of neonates with ileostomy 
resulting from three different primary diseases. This study is very meaningful. But I think the 
statistical analyses within the manuscript need to be improved. Some major comments are as 
follows:  
 
1. Line  90-91: "the NCBI Sequence Read Archive  under accession number PRJNA553095". 
PRJNA553095 is not the accession number of the NCBI Sequence Read Archive. In addition, I 
can't find information about this accession number on NCBI. Please check this information.  
 
2. Figure  1B: It is recommended to add  an error bar, which helps to interpret the data better.  
 
3. Figure  2: the composition of microbiota within each group varied greatly, which affected the 
reliability of the results.  
 
4. Line  146: "the incidence of colitis and sepsis…" and "the increase in body  weight of the 
breastfeeding group was higher than in the non -breast -feeding group". According to the results 
of T-Test and Chi -square test, there was no significance. The difference may cause by the limited 
sample size. So, the conclusion that "breastfeed ing is likely to play a crucial role in …" is less 
reliable.  
 
5. This  article attempted to show that the different etiologies had dissimilar microbial community 
characteristics, but the differences among the groups were less analyzed in the results and 
discussion section.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well desc ribed?  
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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical 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 manuscr ipt: 
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 n ow 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 received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating t o 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 int erests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare tha t I have no competing interests  
 
 
 
 
 
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 this 
manuscri pt 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 cha nge 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: Small intestinal microbiota composition and the prog nosis of infants with ileostomy 
resulting from distinct primary diseases  
 
Version: 3 Date: 03 Jun 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this manuscript, Qian et al. characterized the intestinal microbiota of neonates with ileostomy 
resulting from three different primary diseases. This study is very meaningful. But I think the 
statistical analyses within the manuscript need to be improved. Some major comments are as 
follows:  
 
1. Line  90-91: "the NCBI Sequence Read Archive  under accession number PRJNA553095". 
PRJNA553095 is not the accession number of the NCBI Sequence Read Archive. In addition, I 
can't find information about this accession number on NCBI. Please check this information.  
 
2. Figure  1B: It is recommended to add  an error bar, which helps to interpret the data better.  
 
3. Figure  2: the composition of microbiota within each group varied greatly, which affected the 
reliability of the results.  
 
4. Line  146: "the incidence of colitis and sepsis…" and "the increase in body  weight of the 
breastfeeding group was higher than in the non -breast -feeding group". According to the results 
of T-Test and Chi -square test, there was no significance. The difference may cause by the limited 
sample size. So, the conclusion that "breastfeed ing is likely to play a crucial role in …" is less 
reliable.  
 
5. This  article attempted to show that the different etiologies had dissimilar microbial community 
characteristics, but the differences among the groups were less analyzed in the results and 
discussion section.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well desc ribed?  
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 conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical 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 manuscr ipt: 
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 n ow 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 received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating t o 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 int erests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare tha t I have no competing interests  
 
 
 
 
 
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 this 
manuscri pt 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 cha nge 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