Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal biopsy to diagnose celiac disease is not always required:
Importance of combined antibody tests
Version: 3Date:1 December 2012
Reviewer: Jocelyn Silvester
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to most concerns raised during previous review.
However, concerns regarding the limited generalisability of definition of cutoffs
within the population studied without validation in a separate population have not
been addressed in the discussion nor have the analyses been presented using
the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the tests.
In implementing these changes, a description of methods has been added to the
discussion and a description of results has been incorporated in methods.
This paper is substantially similar to that by Vermeersch et al published in Clinica
chem acta in November 2012 (ref 13), with the paper under review including
anti-deamidated gliadin peptide IgA antibodies which were not analysed by
Vermeersch et al. While the methodology of the Vermeersch et al paper has
been cited, its relation to the work presented has not been included in the
discussion.
Major essential revisions
1. Address the use of test cut-offs defined within the study population and the
relationship to generalisability of results and/or include analysis using both the
self-defined and the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the assays used.
2. Include consideration of the relation between the results in this study and that
reported by Vermeersch et al. In the discussion
3. Ensure that methodology, results and discussion are well-defined and material
is reported in the appropriate section.
Minor essential revisions
1. The reference for methodology for positive and negative likelihood ratios
should be amended as the current reference is inappropriate.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal biopsy to diagnose celiac disease is not always required:
Importance of combined antibody tests
Version: 3Date:1 December 2012
Reviewer: Jocelyn Silvester
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to most concerns raised during previous review.
However, concerns regarding the limited generalisability of definition of cutoffs
within the population studied without validation in a separate population have not
been addressed in the discussion nor have the analyses been presented using
the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the tests.
In implementing these changes, a description of methods has been added to the
discussion and a description of results has been incorporated in methods.
This paper is substantially similar to that by Vermeersch et al published in Clinica
chem acta in November 2012 (ref 13), with the paper under review including
anti-deamidated gliadin peptide IgA antibodies which were not analysed by
Vermeersch et al. While the methodology of the Vermeersch et al paper has
been cited, its relation to the work presented has not been included in the
discussion.
Major essential revisions
1. Address the use of test cut-offs defined within the study population and the
relationship to generalisability of results and/or include analysis using both the
self-defined and the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the assays used.
2. Include consideration of the relation between the results in this study and that
reported by Vermeersch et al. In the discussion
3. Ensure that methodology, results and discussion are well-defined and material
is reported in the appropriate section.
Minor essential revisions
1. The reference for methodology for positive and negative likelihood ratios
should be amended as the current reference is inappropriate.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal biopsy to diagnose celiac disease is not always required:
Importance of combined antibody tests
Version: 3Date:1 December 2012
Reviewer: Jocelyn Silvester
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to most concerns raised during previous review.
However, concerns regarding the limited generalisability of definition of cutoffs
within the population studied without validation in a separate population have not
been addressed in the discussion nor have the analyses been presented using
the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the tests.
In implementing these changes, a description of methods has been added to the
discussion and a description of results has been incorporated in methods.
This paper is substantially similar to that by Vermeersch et al published in Clinica
chem acta in November 2012 (ref 13), with the paper under review including
anti-deamidated gliadin peptide IgA antibodies which were not analysed by
Vermeersch et al. While the methodology of the Vermeersch et al paper has
been cited, its relation to the work presented has not been included in the
discussion.
Major essential revisions
1. Address the use of test cut-offs defined within the study population and the
relationship to generalisability of results and/or include analysis using both the
self-defined and the manufacturer recommended cut-offs for the assays used.
2. Include consideration of the relation between the results in this study and that
reported by Vermeersch et al. In the discussion
3. Ensure that methodology, results and discussion are well-defined and material
is reported in the appropriate section.
Minor essential revisions
1. The reference for methodology for positive and negative likelihood ratios
should be amended as the current reference is inappropriate.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant