Title: Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced CT combined with contrast-enhanced MRI
for colorectal liver metastases: A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 09 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This is the second revision of the manuscript, so I am trying to keep it short.
As I said previously my main concerns were just formally. You did an extensive second revision
on the manuscript and I am mainly satisfied with the results.
However, there are still some flaws in the "Sample size estimation" section.
• p1p_1p1 = Expected sensitivity for CT (0.80)
• p2p_2p2 = Expected sensitivity for MRI (0.70)
• mmm = Matching ratio (1:1)
I don't know what means "p1p-1p1", "p2p-2p2" and "mmm"? These terms are not found in the
formula above.
• Z1##/2Z_{1-\alpha/2}Z1##/2 = Z-score for a 95% confidence level (1.96)
• Z1##Z_{1-\beta}Z1## = Z-score for 80% statistical power (0.84)
It seems to be quite difficult to write an alpha/beta as an  "#"/"#".
Again, the  study  is  otherwise  methodologically  ok  and  the  results  are  not  surprising. The
second revision improved the manuscript substatially.
Title: Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced CT combined with contrast-enhanced MRI
for colorectal liver metastases: A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 09 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This is the second revision of the manuscript, so I am trying to keep it short.
As I said previously my main concerns were just formally. You did an extensive second revision
on the manuscript and I am mainly satisfied with the results.
However, there are still some flaws in the "Sample size estimation" section.
• p1p_1p1 = Expected sensitivity for CT (0.80)
• p2p_2p2 = Expected sensitivity for MRI (0.70)
• mmm = Matching ratio (1:1)
I don't know what means "p1p-1p1", "p2p-2p2" and "mmm"? These terms are not found in the
formula above.
• Z1##/2Z_{1-\alpha/2}Z1##/2 = Z-score for a 95% confidence level (1.96)
• Z1##Z_{1-\beta}Z1## = Z-score for 80% statistical power (0.84)
It seems to be quite difficult to write an alpha/beta as an  "#"/"#".
Again, the  study  is  otherwise  methodologically  ok  and  the  results  are  not  surprising. The
second revision improved the manuscript substatially.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced CT combined with contrast-enhanced MRI
for colorectal liver metastases: A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 09 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This is the second revision of the manuscript, so I am trying to keep it short.
As I said previously my main concerns were just formally. You did an extensive second revision
on the manuscript and I am mainly satisfied with the results.
However, there are still some flaws in the "Sample size estimation" section.
• p1p_1p1 = Expected sensitivity for CT (0.80)
• p2p_2p2 = Expected sensitivity for MRI (0.70)
• mmm = Matching ratio (1:1)
I don't know what means "p1p-1p1", "p2p-2p2" and "mmm"? These terms are not found in the
formula above.
• Z1##/2Z_{1-\alpha/2}Z1##/2 = Z-score for a 95% confidence level (1.96)
• Z1##Z_{1-\beta}Z1## = Z-score for 80% statistical power (0.84)
It seems to be quite difficult to write an alpha/beta as an  "#"/"#".
Again, the  study  is  otherwise  methodologically  ok  and  the  results  are  not  surprising. The
second revision improved the manuscript substatially.
assistant