Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Imbalanced Mucosal Microcirculation in the Remission Stage of Ulcerative Colitis using 
Probe -based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy  
 
Versio n: 3 Date: 11 Jun 2019  
 
Reviewer: Research Square  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
"STATISTICAL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT:  
 
Is the study design appropriate for the research question (considering whether the analyzed 
population accurately reflects the design and wh ether you see any problems with 
control/comparison groups, e.g., likely confounders)?  
Yes - overall design, population, and control groups are appropriate  
 
Are methodologies adequate and well implemented (considering whether assumptions are 
addressed and w hether analyses are robust)?  
Yes - methodologies are adequate and well implemented, assumptions are addressed, analysis is 
robust  
 
Are the analyses adequately communicated (considering whether reporting details are adequate 
and whether figures and tables a re well labeled and described)?  
Yes - important reporting details are present, analyses are adequately communicated, figures and 
tables are well labeled and described  
 
Does the interpretation accurately reflect the analyses without overstatement (consideri ng 
whether limitations/bias are acknowledged and whether accurate descriptors, e.g., 'significant', 
are used?  
Yes - interpretation accurately reflects analyses, limitations/bias are acknowledged, accurate 
descriptors are used  
 
Could an appropriately REVISE D version of this work represent a statistically sound 
contribution?  
Yes - current version has sound statistics  
 
STATISTICAL REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. I have no more comments regarding the statistics.  
In statistic section and tables ""P -value"" should be in lower case.  
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. My previous comments have been answered.  
I have no more comments regarding the statistics."  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in t he 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 wr itten English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, 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 content o f the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization 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 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 interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
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 be 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: Imbalanced Mucosal Microcirculation in the Remission Stage of Ulcerative Colitis using 
Probe -based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy  
 
Versio n: 3 Date: 11 Jun 2019  
 
Reviewer: Research Square  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
"STATISTICAL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT:  
 
Is the study design appropriate for the research question (considering whether the analyzed 
population accurately reflects the design and wh ether you see any problems with 
control/comparison groups, e.g., likely confounders)?  
Yes - overall design, population, and control groups are appropriate  
 
Are methodologies adequate and well implemented (considering whether assumptions are 
addressed and w hether analyses are robust)?  
Yes - methodologies are adequate and well implemented, assumptions are addressed, analysis is 
robust  
 
Are the analyses adequately communicated (considering whether reporting details are adequate 
and whether figures and tables a re well labeled and described)?  
Yes - important reporting details are present, analyses are adequately communicated, figures and 
tables are well labeled and described  
 
Does the interpretation accurately reflect the analyses without overstatement (consideri ng 
whether limitations/bias are acknowledged and whether accurate descriptors, e.g., 'significant', 
are used?  
Yes - interpretation accurately reflects analyses, limitations/bias are acknowledged, accurate 
descriptors are used  
 
Could an appropriately REVISE D version of this work represent a statistically sound 
contribution?  
Yes - current version has sound statistics  
 
STATISTICAL REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. I have no more comments regarding the statistics.  
In statistic section and tables ""P -value"" should be in lower case.  
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. My previous comments have been answered.  
I have no more comments regarding the statistics."  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in t he 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 wr itten English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, 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 content o f the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization 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 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 interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
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 be 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: Imbalanced Mucosal Microcirculation in the Remission Stage of Ulcerative Colitis using 
Probe -based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy  
 
Versio n: 3 Date: 11 Jun 2019  
 
Reviewer: Research Square  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
"STATISTICAL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT:  
 
Is the study design appropriate for the research question (considering whether the analyzed 
population accurately reflects the design and wh ether you see any problems with 
control/comparison groups, e.g., likely confounders)?  
Yes - overall design, population, and control groups are appropriate  
 
Are methodologies adequate and well implemented (considering whether assumptions are 
addressed and w hether analyses are robust)?  
Yes - methodologies are adequate and well implemented, assumptions are addressed, analysis is 
robust  
 
Are the analyses adequately communicated (considering whether reporting details are adequate 
and whether figures and tables a re well labeled and described)?  
Yes - important reporting details are present, analyses are adequately communicated, figures and 
tables are well labeled and described  
 
Does the interpretation accurately reflect the analyses without overstatement (consideri ng 
whether limitations/bias are acknowledged and whether accurate descriptors, e.g., 'significant', 
are used?  
Yes - interpretation accurately reflects analyses, limitations/bias are acknowledged, accurate 
descriptors are used  
 
Could an appropriately REVISE D version of this work represent a statistically sound 
contribution?  
Yes - current version has sound statistics  
 
STATISTICAL REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. I have no more comments regarding the statistics.  
In statistic section and tables ""P -value"" should be in lower case.  
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
I have reviewed the revised manuscript. My previous comments have been answered.  
I have no more comments regarding the statistics."  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in t he 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 wr itten English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, 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 content o f the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization 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 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 interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
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 be 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