Title: Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori
Infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 06 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori Infection:
a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract:
In the meta-analysis reporting method, the conventional odds ratio is not used and the RR is used.
In the results, the effect of folic acid on reducing complications is not significant and the authors
should check the new ones. Also, based on this, they have concluded that it is associated with
reducing complications (safety), which I think is wrong.
Introduction
There are many sentences in the introduction without references. Please review.
The gap of knowledge is not well mentioned.
Methods:
Statistical analyzes are not valid. Was met regression not done?
Result
The heterogeneity of the studies was high in a number of outcomes. How was heterogeneity
resolved? Why was meta-regression not performed?
I expect the characteristics of the studies to be presented in a table (not an Excel spreadsheet).
Why hasn't the publication bias assessment and its results been presented?
Title: Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori
Infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 06 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori Infection:
a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract:
In the meta-analysis reporting method, the conventional odds ratio is not used and the RR is used.
In the results, the effect of folic acid on reducing complications is not significant and the authors
should check the new ones. Also, based on this, they have concluded that it is associated with
reducing complications (safety), which I think is wrong.
Introduction
There are many sentences in the introduction without references. Please review.
The gap of knowledge is not well mentioned.
Methods:
Statistical analyzes are not valid. Was met regression not done?
Result
The heterogeneity of the studies was high in a number of outcomes. How was heterogeneity
resolved? Why was meta-regression not performed?
I expect the characteristics of the studies to be presented in a table (not an Excel spreadsheet).
Why hasn't the publication bias assessment and its results been presented?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori
Infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 06 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Efficacy analysis of folic acid in chronic atrophic gastritis with Helicobacter pylori Infection:
a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract:
In the meta-analysis reporting method, the conventional odds ratio is not used and the RR is used.
In the results, the effect of folic acid on reducing complications is not significant and the authors
should check the new ones. Also, based on this, they have concluded that it is associated with
reducing complications (safety), which I think is wrong.
Introduction
There are many sentences in the introduction without references. Please review.
The gap of knowledge is not well mentioned.
Methods:
Statistical analyzes are not valid. Was met regression not done?
Result
The heterogeneity of the studies was high in a number of outcomes. How was heterogeneity
resolved? Why was meta-regression not performed?
I expect the characteristics of the studies to be presented in a table (not an Excel spreadsheet).
Why hasn't the publication bias assessment and its results been presented?
assistant