Title: Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Cantonese-Chinese version of Rome IV Criteria
and a short Reference Standard for Functional Dyspepsia in China
Version: 1 Date: 19 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
A. Strength
# The title cover the content of the study
# The abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper
# The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study
# The findings described by the author correlate with the results
# The results of the study are confirmatory but not novel.
# The figures and tables clear and legible.
# The manuscript is adequate for ethical issues.
B. Major issues that should be corrected are:
# A sample size of 220 subjects is not representative for Cantonese people, which have over
80 million native speakers with the prevalence of functional dyspepsia is 30%. So, you have to
justify why the sample size of 220 participants is selected in this study?
# You have divide methods in to two phases. Please combine them by replace phase one by
one short paragraph. E.g. “The English version of the Rome IV diagnostic questionnaire were
translated to Cantonese by professional medical translators, and Cantonese R4DQ-FD were pre-
tested in ten FD patients before data collection”.
# Please discuss your pertinent findings in relation to other studies findings.
C. Minor issues that should be corrected are:
# How do you classified health status as poor, very poor, good…? Please put operational
definitions in methods.
# Add China on the title.
Title: Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Cantonese-Chinese version of Rome IV Criteria
and a short Reference Standard for Functional Dyspepsia in China
Version: 1 Date: 19 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
A. Strength
# The title cover the content of the study
# The abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper
# The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study
# The findings described by the author correlate with the results
# The results of the study are confirmatory but not novel.
# The figures and tables clear and legible.
# The manuscript is adequate for ethical issues.
B. Major issues that should be corrected are:
# A sample size of 220 subjects is not representative for Cantonese people, which have over
80 million native speakers with the prevalence of functional dyspepsia is 30%. So, you have to
justify why the sample size of 220 participants is selected in this study?
# You have divide methods in to two phases. Please combine them by replace phase one by
one short paragraph. E.g. “The English version of the Rome IV diagnostic questionnaire were
translated to Cantonese by professional medical translators, and Cantonese R4DQ-FD were pre-
tested in ten FD patients before data collection”.
# Please discuss your pertinent findings in relation to other studies findings.
C. Minor issues that should be corrected are:
# How do you classified health status as poor, very poor, good…? Please put operational
definitions in methods.
# Add China on the title.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Cantonese-Chinese version of Rome IV Criteria
and a short Reference Standard for Functional Dyspepsia in China
Version: 1 Date: 19 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
A. Strength
# The title cover the content of the study
# The abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper
# The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study
# The findings described by the author correlate with the results
# The results of the study are confirmatory but not novel.
# The figures and tables clear and legible.
# The manuscript is adequate for ethical issues.
B. Major issues that should be corrected are:
# A sample size of 220 subjects is not representative for Cantonese people, which have over
80 million native speakers with the prevalence of functional dyspepsia is 30%. So, you have to
justify why the sample size of 220 participants is selected in this study?
# You have divide methods in to two phases. Please combine them by replace phase one by
one short paragraph. E.g. “The English version of the Rome IV diagnostic questionnaire were
translated to Cantonese by professional medical translators, and Cantonese R4DQ-FD were pre-
tested in ten FD patients before data collection”.
# Please discuss your pertinent findings in relation to other studies findings.
C. Minor issues that should be corrected are:
# How do you classified health status as poor, very poor, good…? Please put operational
definitions in methods.
# Add China on the title.
assistant