Title: Bile ductal mucosal dysplasia is a possible risk factor for adenocarcinoma in patients with
adenomyomatous hyperplasia of the Vaterian System: a single-centre study from China
Version: 1 Date: 29 Sep 2023
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)?
No - there are major issues
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are major 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: This is an interesting manuscript reporting a very rare condition but
there are limitations that need to be addressed.  1) the abstract needs to mention the country
and region, the Methods of the abstract nee to include the number of patients and how they
were recruited as well as the list of variables and the values of the incidence and P value need
to be mentioned in the Results of the abstract. 2) in the Methods section, how is this called
incidence?  What is the denominator?  It sounds like a percentage not an incidence?  3) In end
of the Discussion section, future directions should be highlighted in much more detail.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
See the detailed comments above.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
No.
Title: Bile ductal mucosal dysplasia is a possible risk factor for adenocarcinoma in patients with
adenomyomatous hyperplasia of the Vaterian System: a single-centre study from China
Version: 1 Date: 29 Sep 2023
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)?
No - there are major issues
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are major 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: This is an interesting manuscript reporting a very rare condition but
there are limitations that need to be addressed.  1) the abstract needs to mention the country
and region, the Methods of the abstract nee to include the number of patients and how they
were recruited as well as the list of variables and the values of the incidence and P value need
to be mentioned in the Results of the abstract. 2) in the Methods section, how is this called
incidence?  What is the denominator?  It sounds like a percentage not an incidence?  3) In end
of the Discussion section, future directions should be highlighted in much more detail.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
See the detailed comments above.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
No.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Bile ductal mucosal dysplasia is a possible risk factor for adenocarcinoma in patients with
adenomyomatous hyperplasia of the Vaterian System: a single-centre study from China
Version: 1 Date: 29 Sep 2023
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)?
No - there are major issues
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are major 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: This is an interesting manuscript reporting a very rare condition but
there are limitations that need to be addressed.  1) the abstract needs to mention the country
and region, the Methods of the abstract nee to include the number of patients and how they
were recruited as well as the list of variables and the values of the incidence and P value need
to be mentioned in the Results of the abstract. 2) in the Methods section, how is this called
incidence?  What is the denominator?  It sounds like a percentage not an incidence?  3) In end
of the Discussion section, future directions should be highlighted in much more detail.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
See the detailed comments above.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
No.
assistant