Title: Possible use of 2D shear wave liver elastography in new-onset ascites evaluation
Version: 1 Date: 02 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are minor issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are major issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The number of patients is too less for any conclusion. The
manuscript is also quite overtly long and needs substantial pruning.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The presence of free fluid is likely to make the accuracy of elastography suboptimal. There is
no gold std in the study to demonstrate the accuracy of elastography.
Ascites should have been documented as mild, moderate or severe, especially with regards to
the presence of perihepatic fluid. Given the authors write-up, a 20 mm cut off for perihepatic
fluid should have been documented.
The overall number of patients is quite less - 52. This is too less for an accurate evaluation.
The manuscript is overall too long (>4000 words) and needs to be significantly compressed.
Overall English needs to improve.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
NA
Title: Possible use of 2D shear wave liver elastography in new-onset ascites evaluation
Version: 1 Date: 02 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are minor issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are major issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The number of patients is too less for any conclusion. The
manuscript is also quite overtly long and needs substantial pruning.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The presence of free fluid is likely to make the accuracy of elastography suboptimal. There is
no gold std in the study to demonstrate the accuracy of elastography.
Ascites should have been documented as mild, moderate or severe, especially with regards to
the presence of perihepatic fluid. Given the authors write-up, a 20 mm cut off for perihepatic
fluid should have been documented.
The overall number of patients is quite less - 52. This is too less for an accurate evaluation.
The manuscript is overall too long (>4000 words) and needs to be significantly compressed.
Overall English needs to improve.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
NA
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Possible use of 2D shear wave liver elastography in new-onset ascites evaluation
Version: 1 Date: 02 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are minor issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are major issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The number of patients is too less for any conclusion. The
manuscript is also quite overtly long and needs substantial pruning.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The presence of free fluid is likely to make the accuracy of elastography suboptimal. There is
no gold std in the study to demonstrate the accuracy of elastography.
Ascites should have been documented as mild, moderate or severe, especially with regards to
the presence of perihepatic fluid. Given the authors write-up, a 20 mm cut off for perihepatic
fluid should have been documented.
The overall number of patients is quite less - 52. This is too less for an accurate evaluation.
The manuscript is overall too long (>4000 words) and needs to be significantly compressed.
Overall English needs to improve.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
NA
assistant