Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: A potential anatomic subtype of short bowel syndrome: a matched case -control study  
 
Version: 0 Date: 03 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer: Paul Kelly  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This is a very interesting article which addresses a much -neglected clinical problem.  The 
authors have abstracted data from a large datas et and ascertained the outcome of short bowel 
syndrome according to its anatomical characteristics - is the remaining bowel predominantly 
jejunum or ileum? The findings are interesting in that the patients with predominantly intact 
ileum are more likely to  return to enteral feeding. Some minor points need correcting:  
1 The abstract should contain the main results, not just the P value.  
2 "IS" in the abstract is not defined. Should this be "IP"  
3 The clinical pathway needs to be clarified in the text. Thi s paper comes from a transplant 
centre. Please confirm that none of the patients were transplanted during the period of 
observation and clarify in the Methods that this was an exclusion criterion.  
4 Figure 5 would be much more useful if it showed all type s of SBS, not just type 3.  
5 The language needs improving. There are some sentences without verbs; the use of "weren't" is 
unacceptable, and the phrase "well -designed questionnaire" needs clarification (everyone thinks 
their questionnaire is well designed !). 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please spe cify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional s tatistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 received 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 ot her 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 t o any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review 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 websi te along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n 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 name d report can be included as 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: A potential anatomic subtype of short bowel syndrome: a matched case -control study  
 
Version: 0 Date: 03 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer: Paul Kelly  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This is a very interesting article which addresses a much -neglected clinical problem.  The 
authors have abstracted data from a large datas et and ascertained the outcome of short bowel 
syndrome according to its anatomical characteristics - is the remaining bowel predominantly 
jejunum or ileum? The findings are interesting in that the patients with predominantly intact 
ileum are more likely to  return to enteral feeding. Some minor points need correcting:  
1 The abstract should contain the main results, not just the P value.  
2 "IS" in the abstract is not defined. Should this be "IP"  
3 The clinical pathway needs to be clarified in the text. Thi s paper comes from a transplant 
centre. Please confirm that none of the patients were transplanted during the period of 
observation and clarify in the Methods that this was an exclusion criterion.  
4 Figure 5 would be much more useful if it showed all type s of SBS, not just type 3.  
5 The language needs improving. There are some sentences without verbs; the use of "weren't" is 
unacceptable, and the phrase "well -designed questionnaire" needs clarification (everyone thinks 
their questionnaire is well designed !). 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please spe cify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional s tatistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 received 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 ot her 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 t o any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review 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 websi te along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n 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 name d report can be included as 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: A potential anatomic subtype of short bowel syndrome: a matched case -control study  
 
Version: 0 Date: 03 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer: Paul Kelly  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This is a very interesting article which addresses a much -neglected clinical problem.  The 
authors have abstracted data from a large datas et and ascertained the outcome of short bowel 
syndrome according to its anatomical characteristics - is the remaining bowel predominantly 
jejunum or ileum? The findings are interesting in that the patients with predominantly intact 
ileum are more likely to  return to enteral feeding. Some minor points need correcting:  
1 The abstract should contain the main results, not just the P value.  
2 "IS" in the abstract is not defined. Should this be "IP"  
3 The clinical pathway needs to be clarified in the text. Thi s paper comes from a transplant 
centre. Please confirm that none of the patients were transplanted during the period of 
observation and clarify in the Methods that this was an exclusion criterion.  
4 Figure 5 would be much more useful if it showed all type s of SBS, not just type 3.  
5 The language needs improving. There are some sentences without verbs; the use of "weren't" is 
unacceptable, and the phrase "well -designed questionnaire" needs clarification (everyone thinks 
their questionnaire is well designed !). 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please spe cify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional s tatistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 received 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 ot her 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 t o any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review 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 websi te along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n 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 name d report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant