Title: Efficacy and safety comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and
upfront surgery for treating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-
analysis
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reports:
1.Although there are many subjects in the study, the number of included literatures is small, and
all of them are retrospective studies, two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias,
and the other three studies were classified as having a moderate risk of bias, which limits the
quality of the study.
2. Two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias, and the other three studies were
classified as having a moderate risk of bias. Please explain the origin of bias and why you should
continue the study.
3. The reason why do secondary outcomes include mortality rate within 90 days?
Thanks#
Title: Efficacy and safety comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and
upfront surgery for treating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-
analysis
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reports:
1.Although there are many subjects in the study, the number of included literatures is small, and
all of them are retrospective studies, two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias,
and the other three studies were classified as having a moderate risk of bias, which limits the
quality of the study.
2. Two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias, and the other three studies were
classified as having a moderate risk of bias. Please explain the origin of bias and why you should
continue the study.
3. The reason why do secondary outcomes include mortality rate within 90 days?
Thanks#
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Efficacy and safety comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and
upfront surgery for treating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-
analysis
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reports:
1.Although there are many subjects in the study, the number of included literatures is small, and
all of them are retrospective studies, two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias,
and the other three studies were classified as having a moderate risk of bias, which limits the
quality of the study.
2. Two studies were classified as having a serious risk of bias, and the other three studies were
classified as having a moderate risk of bias. Please explain the origin of bias and why you should
continue the study.
3. The reason why do secondary outcomes include mortality rate within 90 days?
Thanks#
assistant