Title: A randomized, controlled trial of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for
bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Version: 1 Date: 10 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
The study addresses a clinically significant issue in gastroenterology, optimal bowel preparation
by comparing a newly approved agent (OSS) with a widely used standard (PEG). However,
there are serious corrections need to be followed-up or mentioned as limitations or included in
the future directions:
• Although the study was single-blinded, endoscopists assessing images may have a limit
knowledge of the preparation utilized. Additional measures, such as double-blinding or
automated BBPS scoring, may enhance objectivity.
• The study lacks pre- and post-preparation electrolyte evaluations, which are critical for
determining the safety of OSS. A future research needs to involve electrolyte monitoring.
• The study mainly focuses on immediate outcomes. The patients should be followed-up post-
colonoscopy to evaluate any delayed adverse effects
• As a single-center study was carried out in Beijing, the findings may not be generalizable
to different populations with different dietary habits and healthcare access. A multicenter trial
would increase external validity.
• Although tolerability is mentioned, more structured information on patient-reported
experiences such as validated questionnaires about taste, bloating, nausea) could offer a more
patient-centric viewpoint.
• While comparative studies on OSS and PEG are mentioned, a more critical appraisal of
conflicting results from other trials would provide a balanced perspective.
Title: A randomized, controlled trial of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for
bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Version: 1 Date: 10 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
The study addresses a clinically significant issue in gastroenterology, optimal bowel preparation
by comparing a newly approved agent (OSS) with a widely used standard (PEG). However,
there are serious corrections need to be followed-up or mentioned as limitations or included in
the future directions:
• Although the study was single-blinded, endoscopists assessing images may have a limit
knowledge of the preparation utilized. Additional measures, such as double-blinding or
automated BBPS scoring, may enhance objectivity.
• The study lacks pre- and post-preparation electrolyte evaluations, which are critical for
determining the safety of OSS. A future research needs to involve electrolyte monitoring.
• The study mainly focuses on immediate outcomes. The patients should be followed-up post-
colonoscopy to evaluate any delayed adverse effects
• As a single-center study was carried out in Beijing, the findings may not be generalizable
to different populations with different dietary habits and healthcare access. A multicenter trial
would increase external validity.
• Although tolerability is mentioned, more structured information on patient-reported
experiences such as validated questionnaires about taste, bloating, nausea) could offer a more
patient-centric viewpoint.
• While comparative studies on OSS and PEG are mentioned, a more critical appraisal of
conflicting results from other trials would provide a balanced perspective.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A randomized, controlled trial of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for
bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Version: 1 Date: 10 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
The study addresses a clinically significant issue in gastroenterology, optimal bowel preparation
by comparing a newly approved agent (OSS) with a widely used standard (PEG). However,
there are serious corrections need to be followed-up or mentioned as limitations or included in
the future directions:
• Although the study was single-blinded, endoscopists assessing images may have a limit
knowledge of the preparation utilized. Additional measures, such as double-blinding or
automated BBPS scoring, may enhance objectivity.
• The study lacks pre- and post-preparation electrolyte evaluations, which are critical for
determining the safety of OSS. A future research needs to involve electrolyte monitoring.
• The study mainly focuses on immediate outcomes. The patients should be followed-up post-
colonoscopy to evaluate any delayed adverse effects
• As a single-center study was carried out in Beijing, the findings may not be generalizable
to different populations with different dietary habits and healthcare access. A multicenter trial
would increase external validity.
• Although tolerability is mentioned, more structured information on patient-reported
experiences such as validated questionnaires about taste, bloating, nausea) could offer a more
patient-centric viewpoint.
• While comparative studies on OSS and PEG are mentioned, a more critical appraisal of
conflicting results from other trials would provide a balanced perspective.
assistant