Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 28 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Tahne Vongsavath
Reviewer's report:
line 15: recommend changing wording. of "we conducted a meta-analysis for the first time" to
something like "we conducted a first of its kind" or something similar.
line 16: warrants small description on what "emotions" were investigated. Seems like a emphasis
on depression?
line 36: "mixed stool" is this referring to stool from multiple donors?
Line 37: Needs more information on depression  Discussion of depressive symptoms and IBS
in the introduction would also be warranted.
Line 52: consistenc -> consistency
Lines 61-63: Would consider rewording, for smoother word flow. "Previous studies indicate the
pathogeneis includes various factors such as ..."
Line 65: again emotions is a very general term
Line 68: "These factors result" recommend rewording, not sure which factors are being described
in this statement
Line 70-72: "on the gut microbiome" for IBS treaments, and explored diverse approaches in its
manipulation such as ....
Line 73: what treatments do these patients remain symptomatic on?
Line 161: please insert numeric for citation
Table 1: science mispelled, what were the differences between rounds 1 and 2 of exclusion for
not meeting inclusion criteria
Line 192: RCTs that reported
Line 199: Would remove either "there were only 9" OR "which is fewer than 10"
Line 201: the three studies that reported long term outcomes
Lines 229-236: please decrease spacing
Line 291: please include p value
Table 2: different spelling of diarrhea used here
Line 305: "in prior meta-analysis" is redundent in this sentance
Line 308: brief wording on what the secondary outcome was
Line 313-315: via colonoscopy; is this overall or also time dependant?
Line 323: has shown vs proven
line 325-326: wordy, may neec sentace combination or revision
line 363: may want to stray from using words like verify
line 394: please include limitations header
supplemental table 1: add additional table for overview of included studies (second included
table) and reference in the text
Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 28 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Tahne Vongsavath
Reviewer's report:
line 15: recommend changing wording. of "we conducted a meta-analysis for the first time" to
something like "we conducted a first of its kind" or something similar.
line 16: warrants small description on what "emotions" were investigated. Seems like a emphasis
on depression?
line 36: "mixed stool" is this referring to stool from multiple donors?
Line 37: Needs more information on depression  Discussion of depressive symptoms and IBS
in the introduction would also be warranted.
Line 52: consistenc -> consistency
Lines 61-63: Would consider rewording, for smoother word flow. "Previous studies indicate the
pathogeneis includes various factors such as ..."
Line 65: again emotions is a very general term
Line 68: "These factors result" recommend rewording, not sure which factors are being described
in this statement
Line 70-72: "on the gut microbiome" for IBS treaments, and explored diverse approaches in its
manipulation such as ....
Line 73: what treatments do these patients remain symptomatic on?
Line 161: please insert numeric for citation
Table 1: science mispelled, what were the differences between rounds 1 and 2 of exclusion for
not meeting inclusion criteria
Line 192: RCTs that reported
Line 199: Would remove either "there were only 9" OR "which is fewer than 10"
Line 201: the three studies that reported long term outcomes
Lines 229-236: please decrease spacing
Line 291: please include p value
Table 2: different spelling of diarrhea used here
Line 305: "in prior meta-analysis" is redundent in this sentance
Line 308: brief wording on what the secondary outcome was
Line 313-315: via colonoscopy; is this overall or also time dependant?
Line 323: has shown vs proven
line 325-326: wordy, may neec sentace combination or revision
line 363: may want to stray from using words like verify
line 394: please include limitations header
supplemental table 1: add additional table for overview of included studies (second included
table) and reference in the text
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 28 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Tahne Vongsavath
Reviewer's report:
line 15: recommend changing wording. of "we conducted a meta-analysis for the first time" to
something like "we conducted a first of its kind" or something similar.
line 16: warrants small description on what "emotions" were investigated. Seems like a emphasis
on depression?
line 36: "mixed stool" is this referring to stool from multiple donors?
Line 37: Needs more information on depression  Discussion of depressive symptoms and IBS
in the introduction would also be warranted.
Line 52: consistenc -> consistency
Lines 61-63: Would consider rewording, for smoother word flow. "Previous studies indicate the
pathogeneis includes various factors such as ..."
Line 65: again emotions is a very general term
Line 68: "These factors result" recommend rewording, not sure which factors are being described
in this statement
Line 70-72: "on the gut microbiome" for IBS treaments, and explored diverse approaches in its
manipulation such as ....
Line 73: what treatments do these patients remain symptomatic on?
Line 161: please insert numeric for citation
Table 1: science mispelled, what were the differences between rounds 1 and 2 of exclusion for
not meeting inclusion criteria
Line 192: RCTs that reported
Line 199: Would remove either "there were only 9" OR "which is fewer than 10"
Line 201: the three studies that reported long term outcomes
Lines 229-236: please decrease spacing
Line 291: please include p value
Table 2: different spelling of diarrhea used here
Line 305: "in prior meta-analysis" is redundent in this sentance
Line 308: brief wording on what the secondary outcome was
Line 313-315: via colonoscopy; is this overall or also time dependant?
Line 323: has shown vs proven
line 325-326: wordy, may neec sentace combination or revision
line 363: may want to stray from using words like verify
line 394: please include limitations header
supplemental table 1: add additional table for overview of included studies (second included
table) and reference in the text
assistant