Title: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective of
hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey
Version: 3 Date: 18 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript "Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective
of hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey" by Rinella et al.
is an unusual approach to a well-known topic: the colleagues conducted a questionnaire
survey to collect different assessments of NASH among patients and physicians. Special
emphasis is placed in the analysis on the 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists who answered the
questionnaire.
I have 3 main points of criticism:
(i) It is unfortunately unclear how the doctors and patients were recruited. The process of
interviewing is described, but how were the patients identified in the first place. There may be
a bias here.
(ii) Both the introduction and the discussion are clearly too long and need to be shortened.
(iii) 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists are too small a cohort to draw valid conclusions. In
some cases, the authors split this cohort into a subgroup of gastroenterologists and a group of
hepatologists and give percentages. With such small groups, single individuals have a massive
impact.
Title: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective of
hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey
Version: 3 Date: 18 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript "Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective
of hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey" by Rinella et al.
is an unusual approach to a well-known topic: the colleagues conducted a questionnaire
survey to collect different assessments of NASH among patients and physicians. Special
emphasis is placed in the analysis on the 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists who answered the
questionnaire.
I have 3 main points of criticism:
(i) It is unfortunately unclear how the doctors and patients were recruited. The process of
interviewing is described, but how were the patients identified in the first place. There may be
a bias here.
(ii) Both the introduction and the discussion are clearly too long and need to be shortened.
(iii) 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists are too small a cohort to draw valid conclusions. In
some cases, the authors split this cohort into a subgroup of gastroenterologists and a group of
hepatologists and give percentages. With such small groups, single individuals have a massive
impact.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective of
hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey
Version: 3 Date: 18 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript "Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis medical patient journey from the perspective
of hepatologists, gastroenterologists and patients: a cross-sectional survey" by Rinella et al.
is an unusual approach to a well-known topic: the colleagues conducted a questionnaire
survey to collect different assessments of NASH among patients and physicians. Special
emphasis is placed in the analysis on the 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists who answered the
questionnaire.
I have 3 main points of criticism:
(i) It is unfortunately unclear how the doctors and patients were recruited. The process of
interviewing is described, but how were the patients identified in the first place. There may be
a bias here.
(ii) Both the introduction and the discussion are clearly too long and need to be shortened.
(iii) 75 gastroenterologists/hepatologists are too small a cohort to draw valid conclusions. In
some cases, the authors split this cohort into a subgroup of gastroenterologists and a group of
hepatologists and give percentages. With such small groups, single individuals have a massive
impact.
assistant