Reviewer's report
Title:Potentially avoidable hospitalisation for constipation in Victoria, Australia in
2010-11
Version:1Date:20 April 2014
Reviewer: KRISTINA LAMAS
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper which is well written and overall well organized. I do
have some comments that the authors should consider in order to improve the
paper.
MAJOR COMPULSORY REVISIONS
Background:
Has the findings relevance from an international point of view? This could be
explained.
p3; The first section in the background, constipation is described as an adverse
effect of medications. Not mention other causes/risks make the reader believe
that the connection between constipation and medications is the main focus
further on. I should recommend to include more causes or exclude all.
p4; Poorly managed constipation is described to lead to faecal impaction which in
turn can to lead to urinary and faecal incontinence. Although constipation is
viewed as a benign condition, it brings a substantial suffering and decreased
quality of life to those affected which should be described.
Method
Cost analysis
p6; I am not sure I understand the cost analysis. I am not familiar with using
case-mixed group and perhaps misunderstand the text. However; A cost-weight
equal to 1 is a reference point based on average cost, what does it mean when
cost weight is below 1? If I understand the result right the WEIS is 0.6 for
constipation. How should I interpret that? Clarification can make this manuscript
easier to understand for reader less experienced in cost analysis.
Result
p11; Descriptions of Figure 4 in the result is not easy to follow. Some part of the
text should perhaps be placed in the method section as it describe how data
were calculated. It is written that indirect and directly standardisations were used,
what does it mean?
Discussion
The economic burden of constipation is nearly $10 million/year. To interpret the
sum it would be helpful to know the relation to total health care costs or other
known large costs in health care. When not familiar with the currency it is difficult
to understand the amount of burden, is it small or extensive?
MINOR ESSENTIAL REVISIONS
Figure 1 and 2; it says rate of separation per 1,000 population, is that right? Or
should it be 10,000?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Potentially avoidable hospitalisation for constipation in Victoria, Australia in
2010-11
Version:1Date:20 April 2014
Reviewer: KRISTINA LAMAS
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper which is well written and overall well organized. I do
have some comments that the authors should consider in order to improve the
paper.
MAJOR COMPULSORY REVISIONS
Background:
Has the findings relevance from an international point of view? This could be
explained.
p3; The first section in the background, constipation is described as an adverse
effect of medications. Not mention other causes/risks make the reader believe
that the connection between constipation and medications is the main focus
further on. I should recommend to include more causes or exclude all.
p4; Poorly managed constipation is described to lead to faecal impaction which in
turn can to lead to urinary and faecal incontinence. Although constipation is
viewed as a benign condition, it brings a substantial suffering and decreased
quality of life to those affected which should be described.
Method
Cost analysis
p6; I am not sure I understand the cost analysis. I am not familiar with using
case-mixed group and perhaps misunderstand the text. However; A cost-weight
equal to 1 is a reference point based on average cost, what does it mean when
cost weight is below 1? If I understand the result right the WEIS is 0.6 for
constipation. How should I interpret that? Clarification can make this manuscript
easier to understand for reader less experienced in cost analysis.
Result
p11; Descriptions of Figure 4 in the result is not easy to follow. Some part of the
text should perhaps be placed in the method section as it describe how data
were calculated. It is written that indirect and directly standardisations were used,
what does it mean?
Discussion
The economic burden of constipation is nearly $10 million/year. To interpret the
sum it would be helpful to know the relation to total health care costs or other
known large costs in health care. When not familiar with the currency it is difficult
to understand the amount of burden, is it small or extensive?
MINOR ESSENTIAL REVISIONS
Figure 1 and 2; it says rate of separation per 1,000 population, is that right? Or
should it be 10,000?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Potentially avoidable hospitalisation for constipation in Victoria, Australia in
2010-11
Version:1Date:20 April 2014
Reviewer: KRISTINA LAMAS
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper which is well written and overall well organized. I do
have some comments that the authors should consider in order to improve the
paper.
MAJOR COMPULSORY REVISIONS
Background:
Has the findings relevance from an international point of view? This could be
explained.
p3; The first section in the background, constipation is described as an adverse
effect of medications. Not mention other causes/risks make the reader believe
that the connection between constipation and medications is the main focus
further on. I should recommend to include more causes or exclude all.
p4; Poorly managed constipation is described to lead to faecal impaction which in
turn can to lead to urinary and faecal incontinence. Although constipation is
viewed as a benign condition, it brings a substantial suffering and decreased
quality of life to those affected which should be described.
Method
Cost analysis
p6; I am not sure I understand the cost analysis. I am not familiar with using
case-mixed group and perhaps misunderstand the text. However; A cost-weight
equal to 1 is a reference point based on average cost, what does it mean when
cost weight is below 1? If I understand the result right the WEIS is 0.6 for
constipation. How should I interpret that? Clarification can make this manuscript
easier to understand for reader less experienced in cost analysis.
Result
p11; Descriptions of Figure 4 in the result is not easy to follow. Some part of the
text should perhaps be placed in the method section as it describe how data
were calculated. It is written that indirect and directly standardisations were used,
what does it mean?
Discussion
The economic burden of constipation is nearly $10 million/year. To interpret the
sum it would be helpful to know the relation to total health care costs or other
known large costs in health care. When not familiar with the currency it is difficult
to understand the amount of burden, is it small or extensive?
MINOR ESSENTIAL REVISIONS
Figure 1 and 2; it says rate of separation per 1,000 population, is that right? Or
should it be 10,000?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant