Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Predictors of fifty days in -hospital mortality in patients with culture negative neutrocytic  
ascites  
 
Version: 0 Date: 27 Dec 2016  
 
Reviewer: Chhagan Bihari  
 
Reviewe r's report:  
 
Author have described the clinical progostic factors in decompensated patients with neutrocytic 
ascites. The stud y does not provide any useful information and the described prognostic 
parameters are well known and have been established described in studies for more than a 
decade in chronic liver disease patients.  
 
 
 
1. Authors need to elaborate the sample size calcula tion and selection of patients. e.g. Total 
number of patient admitted in ICU during this period, how many of them were culture 
positive, how many patients were excluded based on the exclusion criteria, that will give 
the impression of significance of the s tudy in clinical settings.  
 
 
 
2. Define the rationale of using the already known parameters for prognostication of these 
patients. It is a well established fact, that the septic shock, MELD,CTP, AKI all are 
independent risk factors for cirrhotic patients.  
 
 
3. How the authors decided a 50 days in hospital survival. Is it random or due to some 
specific reasons. Some references are required for the same.  
 
 
 
4. How authors can be sure that, the all included 170 patient had first episode of ascites in 
their clinics.  Patient history can not be reliable. It needs some objective protocol  
regarding the taking the history from patients, if authors follow any protocol, same 
should be mentioned as supplementary  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, p lease explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furt her 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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 of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
'I declare that I  have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer r eview 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 a s 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: Predictors of fifty days in -hospital mortality in patients with culture negative neutrocytic  
ascites  
 
Version: 0 Date: 27 Dec 2016  
 
Reviewer: Chhagan Bihari  
 
Reviewe r's report:  
 
Author have described the clinical progostic factors in decompensated patients with neutrocytic 
ascites. The stud y does not provide any useful information and the described prognostic 
parameters are well known and have been established described in studies for more than a 
decade in chronic liver disease patients.  
 
 
 
1. Authors need to elaborate the sample size calcula tion and selection of patients. e.g. Total 
number of patient admitted in ICU during this period, how many of them were culture 
positive, how many patients were excluded based on the exclusion criteria, that will give 
the impression of significance of the s tudy in clinical settings.  
 
 
 
2. Define the rationale of using the already known parameters for prognostication of these 
patients. It is a well established fact, that the septic shock, MELD,CTP, AKI all are 
independent risk factors for cirrhotic patients.  
 
 
3. How the authors decided a 50 days in hospital survival. Is it random or due to some 
specific reasons. Some references are required for the same.  
 
 
 
4. How authors can be sure that, the all included 170 patient had first episode of ascites in 
their clinics.  Patient history can not be reliable. It needs some objective protocol  
regarding the taking the history from patients, if authors follow any protocol, same 
should be mentioned as supplementary  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, p lease explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furt her 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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 of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
'I declare that I  have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer r eview 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 a s 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: Predictors of fifty days in -hospital mortality in patients with culture negative neutrocytic  
ascites  
 
Version: 0 Date: 27 Dec 2016  
 
Reviewer: Chhagan Bihari  
 
Reviewe r's report:  
 
Author have described the clinical progostic factors in decompensated patients with neutrocytic 
ascites. The stud y does not provide any useful information and the described prognostic 
parameters are well known and have been established described in studies for more than a 
decade in chronic liver disease patients.  
 
 
 
1. Authors need to elaborate the sample size calcula tion and selection of patients. e.g. Total 
number of patient admitted in ICU during this period, how many of them were culture 
positive, how many patients were excluded based on the exclusion criteria, that will give 
the impression of significance of the s tudy in clinical settings.  
 
 
 
2. Define the rationale of using the already known parameters for prognostication of these 
patients. It is a well established fact, that the septic shock, MELD,CTP, AKI all are 
independent risk factors for cirrhotic patients.  
 
 
3. How the authors decided a 50 days in hospital survival. Is it random or due to some 
specific reasons. Some references are required for the same.  
 
 
 
4. How authors can be sure that, the all included 170 patient had first episode of ascites in 
their clinics.  Patient history can not be reliable. It needs some objective protocol  
regarding the taking the history from patients, if authors follow any protocol, same 
should be mentioned as supplementary  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, p lease explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furt her 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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 of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you recei ved 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.  
 
'I declare that I  have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer r eview 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 a s confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant