Reviewer's report
Title:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Probiotics in the treatment of
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4Date:18 October 2008
Reviewer: Eamonn M M Quigley
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your responses which are most helpful. I still have soem niggling
issues:
1. I remain troubled by your definition of a the primary outcome to include "pain,
flatulence, bloating, anxiety and QOL". While it is clear that you insist on adhering
to this definition, you must make it absolutely clear that this is your own concept
and at odds with all other clinical and clinical research definitions of IBS that I am
aware of.
2. I am still unclear in regard to how you selected studies for analysis and
presentation of individual symptoms: pain, flatulence and bloating. Did you only
select (as the opening line of each of these sections suggests) those studies that
reported significant improvement in these symptoms. Surely, this would have
been an odd approach.
Minor point: Kajander is mis-spelt in the tables
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
Already declared
Reviewer's report
Title:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Probiotics in the treatment of
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4Date:18 October 2008
Reviewer: Eamonn M M Quigley
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your responses which are most helpful. I still have soem niggling
issues:
1. I remain troubled by your definition of a the primary outcome to include "pain,
flatulence, bloating, anxiety and QOL". While it is clear that you insist on adhering
to this definition, you must make it absolutely clear that this is your own concept
and at odds with all other clinical and clinical research definitions of IBS that I am
aware of.
2. I am still unclear in regard to how you selected studies for analysis and
presentation of individual symptoms: pain, flatulence and bloating. Did you only
select (as the opening line of each of these sections suggests) those studies that
reported significant improvement in these symptoms. Surely, this would have
been an odd approach.
Minor point: Kajander is mis-spelt in the tables
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
Already declared
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Probiotics in the treatment of
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4Date:18 October 2008
Reviewer: Eamonn M M Quigley
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your responses which are most helpful. I still have soem niggling
issues:
1. I remain troubled by your definition of a the primary outcome to include "pain,
flatulence, bloating, anxiety and QOL". While it is clear that you insist on adhering
to this definition, you must make it absolutely clear that this is your own concept
and at odds with all other clinical and clinical research definitions of IBS that I am
aware of.
2. I am still unclear in regard to how you selected studies for analysis and
presentation of individual symptoms: pain, flatulence and bloating. Did you only
select (as the opening line of each of these sections suggests) those studies that
reported significant improvement in these symptoms. Surely, this would have
been an odd approach.
Minor point: Kajander is mis-spelt in the tables
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
Already declared
assistant