Title:  Sex-related Differences in Profiles and Clinical Outcomes of Inflammatory Bowel
Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 07 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Amira A A Othman
Reviewer's report:
First of all
I want to congratulate the authors on their work. In this study, Salem et al reviewed the
recently published comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis describing the incidence
and prevalence of IBD globally in 44 population-based cohort studies. Herein, the primary
objective was to comprehensively review sex-based differences in IBD, including epidemiology,
pathogenesis, phenotypic differences, therapeutic response, and outcomes.
The authors tried to contribute to this field of research with new findings, nevertheless, there is
an observation for which sufficient justification must be obtained.
1. The English writing level is poor, and it is necessary to seek help from an English language
specialist to correct spelling and grammatical errors in the entire text.
2. Abbreviations must be fully written at the first appearance
3. The authors should consider indicating the locality of the studies from which the systematic
review and meta-analysis were performed.
4. The background subsection should include the aim of the study
5.  What is the type of study: a population-based study?
6. In method subsection:
- Should be reconstructed, you may use the following template:
“ The study identified population-based cohorts of patients with IBD for which incidence and
age data were available (17 distinct cohorts from  X (No.) regions of Europe, North America,
Australia, and New Zealand, ……..). We collected data through December 2016 on 95,605
incident cases of Crohn’s disease (CD) (42,831 male and 52,774 female) and 112,004 incident
cases of ulcerative colitis (UC) (61,672 male and 50,332 female). We pooled incidence rate
ratios of CD and UC for the combined cohort and compared differences according to sex using
random effects meta-analysis.
- It would help if you described the aim of your statistical analysis.
7. The resolution of all supplementary figures must be improved according to the journal
guidelines.
8. Metanalysis is better to enclose also:
• Sex-based differences in IBD epidemiology should include:
- IBD incidence.
-  IBD type and phenotype.
• Sex-based differences in IBD pathogenesis
• The risk of IBD associated with environmental exposures.
9. Limitations and strengths should be provided.
10. What are the novel findings of his study compared to previous reviews?
(doi: 10.1177/1756284820915043, doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.06.043)
Title:  Sex-related Differences in Profiles and Clinical Outcomes of Inflammatory Bowel
Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 07 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Amira A A Othman
Reviewer's report:
First of all
I want to congratulate the authors on their work. In this study, Salem et al reviewed the
recently published comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis describing the incidence
and prevalence of IBD globally in 44 population-based cohort studies. Herein, the primary
objective was to comprehensively review sex-based differences in IBD, including epidemiology,
pathogenesis, phenotypic differences, therapeutic response, and outcomes.
The authors tried to contribute to this field of research with new findings, nevertheless, there is
an observation for which sufficient justification must be obtained.
1. The English writing level is poor, and it is necessary to seek help from an English language
specialist to correct spelling and grammatical errors in the entire text.
2. Abbreviations must be fully written at the first appearance
3. The authors should consider indicating the locality of the studies from which the systematic
review and meta-analysis were performed.
4. The background subsection should include the aim of the study
5.  What is the type of study: a population-based study?
6. In method subsection:
- Should be reconstructed, you may use the following template:
“ The study identified population-based cohorts of patients with IBD for which incidence and
age data were available (17 distinct cohorts from  X (No.) regions of Europe, North America,
Australia, and New Zealand, ……..). We collected data through December 2016 on 95,605
incident cases of Crohn’s disease (CD) (42,831 male and 52,774 female) and 112,004 incident
cases of ulcerative colitis (UC) (61,672 male and 50,332 female). We pooled incidence rate
ratios of CD and UC for the combined cohort and compared differences according to sex using
random effects meta-analysis.
- It would help if you described the aim of your statistical analysis.
7. The resolution of all supplementary figures must be improved according to the journal
guidelines.
8. Metanalysis is better to enclose also:
• Sex-based differences in IBD epidemiology should include:
- IBD incidence.
-  IBD type and phenotype.
• Sex-based differences in IBD pathogenesis
• The risk of IBD associated with environmental exposures.
9. Limitations and strengths should be provided.
10. What are the novel findings of his study compared to previous reviews?
(doi: 10.1177/1756284820915043, doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.06.043)
Please review this paper.
user
Title:  Sex-related Differences in Profiles and Clinical Outcomes of Inflammatory Bowel
Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 07 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Amira A A Othman
Reviewer's report:
First of all
I want to congratulate the authors on their work. In this study, Salem et al reviewed the
recently published comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis describing the incidence
and prevalence of IBD globally in 44 population-based cohort studies. Herein, the primary
objective was to comprehensively review sex-based differences in IBD, including epidemiology,
pathogenesis, phenotypic differences, therapeutic response, and outcomes.
The authors tried to contribute to this field of research with new findings, nevertheless, there is
an observation for which sufficient justification must be obtained.
1. The English writing level is poor, and it is necessary to seek help from an English language
specialist to correct spelling and grammatical errors in the entire text.
2. Abbreviations must be fully written at the first appearance
3. The authors should consider indicating the locality of the studies from which the systematic
review and meta-analysis were performed.
4. The background subsection should include the aim of the study
5.  What is the type of study: a population-based study?
6. In method subsection:
- Should be reconstructed, you may use the following template:
“ The study identified population-based cohorts of patients with IBD for which incidence and
age data were available (17 distinct cohorts from  X (No.) regions of Europe, North America,
Australia, and New Zealand, ……..). We collected data through December 2016 on 95,605
incident cases of Crohn’s disease (CD) (42,831 male and 52,774 female) and 112,004 incident
cases of ulcerative colitis (UC) (61,672 male and 50,332 female). We pooled incidence rate
ratios of CD and UC for the combined cohort and compared differences according to sex using
random effects meta-analysis.
- It would help if you described the aim of your statistical analysis.
7. The resolution of all supplementary figures must be improved according to the journal
guidelines.
8. Metanalysis is better to enclose also:
• Sex-based differences in IBD epidemiology should include:
- IBD incidence.
-  IBD type and phenotype.
• Sex-based differences in IBD pathogenesis
• The risk of IBD associated with environmental exposures.
9. Limitations and strengths should be provided.
10. What are the novel findings of his study compared to previous reviews?
(doi: 10.1177/1756284820915043, doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.06.043)
assistant