Reviewer's report
Title:Polyethylene glycol vs. sodium phosphate for bowel preparation: A
treatment arm meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Version: 2Date:12 October 2010
Reviewer: Mark Korsten
Reviewer's report:
This is a well-written and important contribution that confirms previous studies
showing that a sodium phosphate hyperosmotic preparation is superior to
polyethylene glycol-based lavage solutions prior to colonoscopy. However, I
would point out that the definition of what constitutes an "excellent" prep quality
was not a component of the publication selection criteria. In other words, there is
no mention of how prep efficacy was assessed. Most studies use some sort of
scoring systems but some of these approaches are rather subjective and,
therefore, quite unreliable. I would also point out that compliance is rarely an all
or none phenomenon. "Failure to complete" a preparation may indicate very little
of the material was consumed or, alternatively, could mean that most was
ingested, just not 100%. The reviewer is aware that a meta-analysis probably
cannot capture these subtleties but I believe it would nevertheless be worth
commenting on these issues in the paper.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
The reviewer has performed a prospective trial designed to assess the renal
toxicity and efficacy of a sodium phosphate(PhosphoSoda)purgative prior to
colonoscopy. Provided that subjects had no evidence of renal compromise within
one week prior to sodium phosphate administration, renal failure was not noted
and the quality of the sodium phosphate preparation was found to be superior to
that after PEG. Therefore, although the reviewer is probably somewhat biased
from an intellectual standpoint, I can categorically state that I have no other
competing interests, including financial, in this matter.
Reviewer's report
Title:Polyethylene glycol vs. sodium phosphate for bowel preparation: A
treatment arm meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Version: 2Date:12 October 2010
Reviewer: Mark Korsten
Reviewer's report:
This is a well-written and important contribution that confirms previous studies
showing that a sodium phosphate hyperosmotic preparation is superior to
polyethylene glycol-based lavage solutions prior to colonoscopy. However, I
would point out that the definition of what constitutes an "excellent" prep quality
was not a component of the publication selection criteria. In other words, there is
no mention of how prep efficacy was assessed. Most studies use some sort of
scoring systems but some of these approaches are rather subjective and,
therefore, quite unreliable. I would also point out that compliance is rarely an all
or none phenomenon. "Failure to complete" a preparation may indicate very little
of the material was consumed or, alternatively, could mean that most was
ingested, just not 100%. The reviewer is aware that a meta-analysis probably
cannot capture these subtleties but I believe it would nevertheless be worth
commenting on these issues in the paper.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
The reviewer has performed a prospective trial designed to assess the renal
toxicity and efficacy of a sodium phosphate(PhosphoSoda)purgative prior to
colonoscopy. Provided that subjects had no evidence of renal compromise within
one week prior to sodium phosphate administration, renal failure was not noted
and the quality of the sodium phosphate preparation was found to be superior to
that after PEG. Therefore, although the reviewer is probably somewhat biased
from an intellectual standpoint, I can categorically state that I have no other
competing interests, including financial, in this matter.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Polyethylene glycol vs. sodium phosphate for bowel preparation: A
treatment arm meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Version: 2Date:12 October 2010
Reviewer: Mark Korsten
Reviewer's report:
This is a well-written and important contribution that confirms previous studies
showing that a sodium phosphate hyperosmotic preparation is superior to
polyethylene glycol-based lavage solutions prior to colonoscopy. However, I
would point out that the definition of what constitutes an "excellent" prep quality
was not a component of the publication selection criteria. In other words, there is
no mention of how prep efficacy was assessed. Most studies use some sort of
scoring systems but some of these approaches are rather subjective and,
therefore, quite unreliable. I would also point out that compliance is rarely an all
or none phenomenon. "Failure to complete" a preparation may indicate very little
of the material was consumed or, alternatively, could mean that most was
ingested, just not 100%. The reviewer is aware that a meta-analysis probably
cannot capture these subtleties but I believe it would nevertheless be worth
commenting on these issues in the paper.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
The reviewer has performed a prospective trial designed to assess the renal
toxicity and efficacy of a sodium phosphate(PhosphoSoda)purgative prior to
colonoscopy. Provided that subjects had no evidence of renal compromise within
one week prior to sodium phosphate administration, renal failure was not noted
and the quality of the sodium phosphate preparation was found to be superior to
that after PEG. Therefore, although the reviewer is probably somewhat biased
from an intellectual standpoint, I can categorically state that I have no other
competing interests, including financial, in this matter.
assistant