Title: Evaluating the Diagnostic Accuracy of Heat Shock Proteins and their Combination with
Alpha-Fetoprotein in the Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Mohammad Zare
Reviewer's report:
Regardless of any opinion about the details of this manuscript, I have decided to reject it due to its
flawed methodological approach. The authors employed univariate methods to calculate pooled
summary points using MetaDisc 1.4—an approach that is deemed unacceptable for diagnostic
test accuracy (DTA) studies for more than 10 years. Instead, they should have used the bivariate/
HSROC model, which is in line with the guidelines set by Cochrane. Furthermore, although
the authors mentioned using STATA as an acceptable software for DTA studies (the metandi
or midas packages), I could not find any figures in the manuscript that were generated using
this software.
Title: Evaluating the Diagnostic Accuracy of Heat Shock Proteins and their Combination with
Alpha-Fetoprotein in the Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Mohammad Zare
Reviewer's report:
Regardless of any opinion about the details of this manuscript, I have decided to reject it due to its
flawed methodological approach. The authors employed univariate methods to calculate pooled
summary points using MetaDisc 1.4—an approach that is deemed unacceptable for diagnostic
test accuracy (DTA) studies for more than 10 years. Instead, they should have used the bivariate/
HSROC model, which is in line with the guidelines set by Cochrane. Furthermore, although
the authors mentioned using STATA as an acceptable software for DTA studies (the metandi
or midas packages), I could not find any figures in the manuscript that were generated using
this software.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Evaluating the Diagnostic Accuracy of Heat Shock Proteins and their Combination with
Alpha-Fetoprotein in the Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Mohammad Zare
Reviewer's report:
Regardless of any opinion about the details of this manuscript, I have decided to reject it due to its
flawed methodological approach. The authors employed univariate methods to calculate pooled
summary points using MetaDisc 1.4—an approach that is deemed unacceptable for diagnostic
test accuracy (DTA) studies for more than 10 years. Instead, they should have used the bivariate/
HSROC model, which is in line with the guidelines set by Cochrane. Furthermore, although
the authors mentioned using STATA as an acceptable software for DTA studies (the metandi
or midas packages), I could not find any figures in the manuscript that were generated using
this software.
assistant