Title: Establishing an AI Model and Application for Automated Capsule Endoscopy
Recognition Based on Convolutional Neural Networks (with Video)
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is valid, adds to the body of evidence and attempts to provide a solution that will
fit all systems. This is not the first time an attempt like this has been made, as a similar approach
is described in the following that has not been included in the reference list:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35931065/
The introduction lacks several seminal references to show that the authors know the field; I have
highlighted the sentences (and provided extensive editorial work) in the attached folder.
The missing references are as follows from the first highlighted sentence to the rest:
1.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34016545/
2.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33005262/
3.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33448511/
4.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36338789/
5.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35834249/
Including images as an integral part of the manuscript can be problematic and confusing, as they
interfere with the reviewing process (usually placed at the end of the manuscript to allow for
speedy review).
Spacing 1.5 is not necessary; it can also be upsetting.
The figure that demonstrates the study path needs to be redrawn.
Thanks
Title: Establishing an AI Model and Application for Automated Capsule Endoscopy
Recognition Based on Convolutional Neural Networks (with Video)
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is valid, adds to the body of evidence and attempts to provide a solution that will
fit all systems. This is not the first time an attempt like this has been made, as a similar approach
is described in the following that has not been included in the reference list:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35931065/
The introduction lacks several seminal references to show that the authors know the field; I have
highlighted the sentences (and provided extensive editorial work) in the attached folder.
The missing references are as follows from the first highlighted sentence to the rest:
1.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34016545/
2.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33005262/
3.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33448511/
4.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36338789/
5.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35834249/
Including images as an integral part of the manuscript can be problematic and confusing, as they
interfere with the reviewing process (usually placed at the end of the manuscript to allow for
speedy review).
Spacing 1.5 is not necessary; it can also be upsetting.
The figure that demonstrates the study path needs to be redrawn.
Thanks
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Establishing an AI Model and Application for Automated Capsule Endoscopy
Recognition Based on Convolutional Neural Networks (with Video)
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is valid, adds to the body of evidence and attempts to provide a solution that will
fit all systems. This is not the first time an attempt like this has been made, as a similar approach
is described in the following that has not been included in the reference list:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35931065/
The introduction lacks several seminal references to show that the authors know the field; I have
highlighted the sentences (and provided extensive editorial work) in the attached folder.
The missing references are as follows from the first highlighted sentence to the rest:
1.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34016545/
2.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33005262/
3.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33448511/
4.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36338789/
5.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35834249/
Including images as an integral part of the manuscript can be problematic and confusing, as they
interfere with the reviewing process (usually placed at the end of the manuscript to allow for
speedy review).
Spacing 1.5 is not necessary; it can also be upsetting.
The figure that demonstrates the study path needs to be redrawn.
Thanks
assistant