Title: Portal Vein Thrombosis and Esophageal-Gastric Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: Shared
Risk Factors and Causal Relationship
Version: 0 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This paper analyzed the common risk factors of PVT and EVB and the correlation between these
two major complications in patients with cirrhosis.
However, this article has many shortcomings.
1.Overall, the language of this article needs to be refined. The preface is too long to explain the
intention clearly, and it is written like a discussion and needs to be rewritten.
2.Please explain “no history of gastrointestinal bleeding prior to their first hospitalization”#is
this reasonable#
3.Feeling that the meaning is the same, not expressed clearly, “(1) All patients were divided into
EVB and non-EVB groups to analyze the influencing factors of EVB occurrence in patients with
cirrhosis; (2) All patients were divided into PVT and non-PVT groups to analyze the influencing
factors of PVT occurrence in patients with cirrhosis”.
4.The section of “Grouping and Observation Indicators”,not reasonable and no scientific
grouping.
5.The grouping is unscientific, and there are unscientific aspects to the results section, which
requires restatistics and rewriting of the results based on the grouping.
6.In the discussion section, the views of this article and the links to the relevant literature are
not fully explained clearly.
7.Throughout the full text, the writing is not standardized. For scientific papers, one paragraph
should not be too long, just 4-6 lines to illustrate the situation.The preface of this article is
too long, there is too little of the section of discussion, and the arrangement of paragraphs is
unreasonable.
Title: Portal Vein Thrombosis and Esophageal-Gastric Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: Shared
Risk Factors and Causal Relationship
Version: 0 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This paper analyzed the common risk factors of PVT and EVB and the correlation between these
two major complications in patients with cirrhosis.
However, this article has many shortcomings.
1.Overall, the language of this article needs to be refined. The preface is too long to explain the
intention clearly, and it is written like a discussion and needs to be rewritten.
2.Please explain “no history of gastrointestinal bleeding prior to their first hospitalization”#is
this reasonable#
3.Feeling that the meaning is the same, not expressed clearly, “(1) All patients were divided into
EVB and non-EVB groups to analyze the influencing factors of EVB occurrence in patients with
cirrhosis; (2) All patients were divided into PVT and non-PVT groups to analyze the influencing
factors of PVT occurrence in patients with cirrhosis”.
4.The section of “Grouping and Observation Indicators”,not reasonable and no scientific
grouping.
5.The grouping is unscientific, and there are unscientific aspects to the results section, which
requires restatistics and rewriting of the results based on the grouping.
6.In the discussion section, the views of this article and the links to the relevant literature are
not fully explained clearly.
7.Throughout the full text, the writing is not standardized. For scientific papers, one paragraph
should not be too long, just 4-6 lines to illustrate the situation.The preface of this article is
too long, there is too little of the section of discussion, and the arrangement of paragraphs is
unreasonable.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Portal Vein Thrombosis and Esophageal-Gastric Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: Shared
Risk Factors and Causal Relationship
Version: 0 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This paper analyzed the common risk factors of PVT and EVB and the correlation between these
two major complications in patients with cirrhosis.
However, this article has many shortcomings.
1.Overall, the language of this article needs to be refined. The preface is too long to explain the
intention clearly, and it is written like a discussion and needs to be rewritten.
2.Please explain “no history of gastrointestinal bleeding prior to their first hospitalization”#is
this reasonable#
3.Feeling that the meaning is the same, not expressed clearly, “(1) All patients were divided into
EVB and non-EVB groups to analyze the influencing factors of EVB occurrence in patients with
cirrhosis; (2) All patients were divided into PVT and non-PVT groups to analyze the influencing
factors of PVT occurrence in patients with cirrhosis”.
4.The section of “Grouping and Observation Indicators”,not reasonable and no scientific
grouping.
5.The grouping is unscientific, and there are unscientific aspects to the results section, which
requires restatistics and rewriting of the results based on the grouping.
6.In the discussion section, the views of this article and the links to the relevant literature are
not fully explained clearly.
7.Throughout the full text, the writing is not standardized. For scientific papers, one paragraph
should not be too long, just 4-6 lines to illustrate the situation.The preface of this article is
too long, there is too little of the section of discussion, and the arrangement of paragraphs is
unreasonable.
assistant