Title: The association between plant-based diet indices and risk of mortality in patients with
cirrhosis: a cohort Study
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
I thank the editor for inviting me to review this manuscript. I have several comments.
1. Please give the references for the classification of extremely low or high energy intake and
implausible BMI.
2. The authors should provide the diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis. Were the participants recruited
based on consistent diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis?
3. How was the outcome (i.e., mortality) measured? Was it solely through the telephone? If the
inquiry was made over the phone, did the researchers verify the outcome regarding whether
the participant had died? What methods were used for verification? Additionally, based on
my understanding, if a participant has passed away, would their family members have enough
patience to inform you of the exact time and causes of death? How did the authors control for
loss to follow-up? This is a crucial part of the article, and the authors should provide a detailed
explanation.
4. Are there any important confounding factors that the authors considered? For example,
physical activity.
5. I recommend that the authors include a flowchart showing the enrollment and exclusion
process, indicating how many participants were excluded at each step.
6. The study recruited participants with cirrhosis within the past six months. When the authors
used the FFQ to inquire about their diet, did they ask about the past year or the past six months?
These are all crucial pieces of information, but they are not described in the article.
7. In the statistical analysis section, there is a covariate called etiology. The authors should
provide a brief introduction and definition of it.
8. In Table 1, for categorical variables, in addition to providing percentages, the authors should
also include the actual counts.
9. The sample size of this study is relatively small, resulting in some hazard ratios (HR) being
very small and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) having a wide range. I recommend that the
authors calculate the statistical power.
Title: The association between plant-based diet indices and risk of mortality in patients with
cirrhosis: a cohort Study
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
I thank the editor for inviting me to review this manuscript. I have several comments.
1. Please give the references for the classification of extremely low or high energy intake and
implausible BMI.
2. The authors should provide the diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis. Were the participants recruited
based on consistent diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis?
3. How was the outcome (i.e., mortality) measured? Was it solely through the telephone? If the
inquiry was made over the phone, did the researchers verify the outcome regarding whether
the participant had died? What methods were used for verification? Additionally, based on
my understanding, if a participant has passed away, would their family members have enough
patience to inform you of the exact time and causes of death? How did the authors control for
loss to follow-up? This is a crucial part of the article, and the authors should provide a detailed
explanation.
4. Are there any important confounding factors that the authors considered? For example,
physical activity.
5. I recommend that the authors include a flowchart showing the enrollment and exclusion
process, indicating how many participants were excluded at each step.
6. The study recruited participants with cirrhosis within the past six months. When the authors
used the FFQ to inquire about their diet, did they ask about the past year or the past six months?
These are all crucial pieces of information, but they are not described in the article.
7. In the statistical analysis section, there is a covariate called etiology. The authors should
provide a brief introduction and definition of it.
8. In Table 1, for categorical variables, in addition to providing percentages, the authors should
also include the actual counts.
9. The sample size of this study is relatively small, resulting in some hazard ratios (HR) being
very small and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) having a wide range. I recommend that the
authors calculate the statistical power.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The association between plant-based diet indices and risk of mortality in patients with
cirrhosis: a cohort Study
Version: 1 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
I thank the editor for inviting me to review this manuscript. I have several comments.
1. Please give the references for the classification of extremely low or high energy intake and
implausible BMI.
2. The authors should provide the diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis. Were the participants recruited
based on consistent diagnostic criteria for cirrhosis?
3. How was the outcome (i.e., mortality) measured? Was it solely through the telephone? If the
inquiry was made over the phone, did the researchers verify the outcome regarding whether
the participant had died? What methods were used for verification? Additionally, based on
my understanding, if a participant has passed away, would their family members have enough
patience to inform you of the exact time and causes of death? How did the authors control for
loss to follow-up? This is a crucial part of the article, and the authors should provide a detailed
explanation.
4. Are there any important confounding factors that the authors considered? For example,
physical activity.
5. I recommend that the authors include a flowchart showing the enrollment and exclusion
process, indicating how many participants were excluded at each step.
6. The study recruited participants with cirrhosis within the past six months. When the authors
used the FFQ to inquire about their diet, did they ask about the past year or the past six months?
These are all crucial pieces of information, but they are not described in the article.
7. In the statistical analysis section, there is a covariate called etiology. The authors should
provide a brief introduction and definition of it.
8. In Table 1, for categorical variables, in addition to providing percentages, the authors should
also include the actual counts.
9. The sample size of this study is relatively small, resulting in some hazard ratios (HR) being
very small and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) having a wide range. I recommend that the
authors calculate the statistical power.
assistant