Title: Descriptive Analysis of Common Causes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Pediatric
Patients in Kerman: A Study from 2022 to 2023
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank the journal for considering me as a reviewer for this manuscript. After a
careful evaluation, I provide the following comments for consideration:
1. Structure, Abstract, Introduction, and Discussion
The abstract could include quantitative data in the conclusion to highlight key findings, such
as specific percentages or outcomes (e.g., the diagnostic yield of endoscopy or the most
common etiology). The introduction should better define the research gap by providing a detailed
rationale for the novelty and impact of the study. Furthermore, the discussion would benefit
from an expanded integration of the results with existing literature and a focus on clinical and
practical implications. For example, the authors could discuss how their findings might influence
diagnostic algorithms or management strategies in similar regional settings. Briefly proposing
future research directions based on identified limitations would also enhance this section.
2. Methods Clarity
The sample size determination lacks a power analysis or justification for the use of a census
approach. Adding a rationale for the chosen sample size and explaining its adequacy for
detecting significant differences would improve the methodological rigor.
3. Statistical Analysis
The results section could benefit from additional statistical insights, such as confidence intervals
for key findings or a subgroup analysis of specific age groups. This would strengthen the
manuscript's conclusions regarding age-dependent variations in UGIB causes.
4. Novelty and Regional Focus
While the study addresses a significant gap in regional data on pediatric UGIB, the discussion
could expand on how the findings align or differ from global patterns in UGIB epidemiology.
This would underscore the broader relevance of the study.
5. Language and Readability
Minor grammatical and stylistic improvements are needed to enhance readability. For example,
some sentences in the abstract and discussion sections are overly verbose and could be simplified
for clarity.
6. Figures and Tables
the manuscript relies heavily on text to convey results. Enhancing the figures (e.g., adding
labeled graphs or improving the clarity of Figure 1) and ensuring that tables are formatted per
journal guidelines would improve the visual presentation of data. Consider adding a graph that
shows the age-wise distribution of UGIB causes for better readability.
7. References
While the manuscript cites relevant studies, some references are slightly dated (e.g., publications
from over a decade ago). Including more recent studies, particularly systematic reviews or meta-
analyses, would strengthen the literature foundation.
8. Ethical Considerations
Although ethical approval and informed consent are mentioned, the authors could clarify
whether the informed consent process was also adapted for pediatric populations, ensuring
alignment with ethical standards for research involving minors.
9. Limitations
The limitations section identifies issues like the retrospective design and single-center focus.
Expanding on how these limitations could impact the results or proposing specific strategies to
address them in future studies would strengthen this section.
Title: Descriptive Analysis of Common Causes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Pediatric
Patients in Kerman: A Study from 2022 to 2023
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank the journal for considering me as a reviewer for this manuscript. After a
careful evaluation, I provide the following comments for consideration:
1. Structure, Abstract, Introduction, and Discussion
The abstract could include quantitative data in the conclusion to highlight key findings, such
as specific percentages or outcomes (e.g., the diagnostic yield of endoscopy or the most
common etiology). The introduction should better define the research gap by providing a detailed
rationale for the novelty and impact of the study. Furthermore, the discussion would benefit
from an expanded integration of the results with existing literature and a focus on clinical and
practical implications. For example, the authors could discuss how their findings might influence
diagnostic algorithms or management strategies in similar regional settings. Briefly proposing
future research directions based on identified limitations would also enhance this section.
2. Methods Clarity
The sample size determination lacks a power analysis or justification for the use of a census
approach. Adding a rationale for the chosen sample size and explaining its adequacy for
detecting significant differences would improve the methodological rigor.
3. Statistical Analysis
The results section could benefit from additional statistical insights, such as confidence intervals
for key findings or a subgroup analysis of specific age groups. This would strengthen the
manuscript's conclusions regarding age-dependent variations in UGIB causes.
4. Novelty and Regional Focus
While the study addresses a significant gap in regional data on pediatric UGIB, the discussion
could expand on how the findings align or differ from global patterns in UGIB epidemiology.
This would underscore the broader relevance of the study.
5. Language and Readability
Minor grammatical and stylistic improvements are needed to enhance readability. For example,
some sentences in the abstract and discussion sections are overly verbose and could be simplified
for clarity.
6. Figures and Tables
the manuscript relies heavily on text to convey results. Enhancing the figures (e.g., adding
labeled graphs or improving the clarity of Figure 1) and ensuring that tables are formatted per
journal guidelines would improve the visual presentation of data. Consider adding a graph that
shows the age-wise distribution of UGIB causes for better readability.
7. References
While the manuscript cites relevant studies, some references are slightly dated (e.g., publications
from over a decade ago). Including more recent studies, particularly systematic reviews or meta-
analyses, would strengthen the literature foundation.
8. Ethical Considerations
Although ethical approval and informed consent are mentioned, the authors could clarify
whether the informed consent process was also adapted for pediatric populations, ensuring
alignment with ethical standards for research involving minors.
9. Limitations
The limitations section identifies issues like the retrospective design and single-center focus.
Expanding on how these limitations could impact the results or proposing specific strategies to
address them in future studies would strengthen this section.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Descriptive Analysis of Common Causes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Pediatric
Patients in Kerman: A Study from 2022 to 2023
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank the journal for considering me as a reviewer for this manuscript. After a
careful evaluation, I provide the following comments for consideration:
1. Structure, Abstract, Introduction, and Discussion
The abstract could include quantitative data in the conclusion to highlight key findings, such
as specific percentages or outcomes (e.g., the diagnostic yield of endoscopy or the most
common etiology). The introduction should better define the research gap by providing a detailed
rationale for the novelty and impact of the study. Furthermore, the discussion would benefit
from an expanded integration of the results with existing literature and a focus on clinical and
practical implications. For example, the authors could discuss how their findings might influence
diagnostic algorithms or management strategies in similar regional settings. Briefly proposing
future research directions based on identified limitations would also enhance this section.
2. Methods Clarity
The sample size determination lacks a power analysis or justification for the use of a census
approach. Adding a rationale for the chosen sample size and explaining its adequacy for
detecting significant differences would improve the methodological rigor.
3. Statistical Analysis
The results section could benefit from additional statistical insights, such as confidence intervals
for key findings or a subgroup analysis of specific age groups. This would strengthen the
manuscript's conclusions regarding age-dependent variations in UGIB causes.
4. Novelty and Regional Focus
While the study addresses a significant gap in regional data on pediatric UGIB, the discussion
could expand on how the findings align or differ from global patterns in UGIB epidemiology.
This would underscore the broader relevance of the study.
5. Language and Readability
Minor grammatical and stylistic improvements are needed to enhance readability. For example,
some sentences in the abstract and discussion sections are overly verbose and could be simplified
for clarity.
6. Figures and Tables
the manuscript relies heavily on text to convey results. Enhancing the figures (e.g., adding
labeled graphs or improving the clarity of Figure 1) and ensuring that tables are formatted per
journal guidelines would improve the visual presentation of data. Consider adding a graph that
shows the age-wise distribution of UGIB causes for better readability.
7. References
While the manuscript cites relevant studies, some references are slightly dated (e.g., publications
from over a decade ago). Including more recent studies, particularly systematic reviews or meta-
analyses, would strengthen the literature foundation.
8. Ethical Considerations
Although ethical approval and informed consent are mentioned, the authors could clarify
whether the informed consent process was also adapted for pediatric populations, ensuring
alignment with ethical standards for research involving minors.
9. Limitations
The limitations section identifies issues like the retrospective design and single-center focus.
Expanding on how these limitations could impact the results or proposing specific strategies to
address them in future studies would strengthen this section.
assistant