Reviewer’s report
Title: Serum D-dimer Levels at Admission for Prediction of Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis
Version: 0 Date: 24 Mar 2019
Reviewer: WQ Li
Reviewer's report:
Early prediction of acute pancreatitis (AP) severity is one of clinical work and research focus. Although  
many studies and various prediction methods have been reported, there is still a long way to go from  
clinical application. This is a good study. First, the sample size is large, and time stratification is carried  
out according to the different time after admission. Second, D-dimer is a test index which has been  
routinely used in clinical practice to facilitate the later clinical application. Although there are some  
articles on D-dimer and AP (including those of our team), I still think this is a good clinical study and  
worth publishing. Of course, there are some problems in the article, which need to be revised.
1. Please utilise the assistance of a Professional English Language editing service - the manuscript  
is ridden with language errors throughout, which distracts readers from the message the authors  
wish to get across.
2. There are several abbreviations used throughout the manuscript without clarifying to the reader  
what they actually mean. One must not assume that the abbreviations used are universally  
accepted, even among pancreatologists. Will the authors please ensure that these are clarified  
throughout the manuscript?
3. Also, if the submitted manuscript is to be revised, I would strongly advise the authors to review  
all their data on AP and strictly classify the severity of AP in their patients as suggested by the  
landmark paper by Banks et al.
4. In the discussion section, please explain the possible mechanism of D-dimer caused aggravation  
of pancreatitis
5. Some percentages in the chart are suggested to be replaced by One decimal post-point.
6. This study is a retrospective study, and a prospective large samples study should be designed to  
verify this conclusion in the future.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an additional  
statistical review?
If  an  additional  statistical  review  is  recommended,  please  specify  what  aspects  require  further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.
I am able to assess the statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation  that  may  in  any  way  gain  or  lose  financially  from  the  publication  of  this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially  
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3. Do  you  hold  or are  you  currently applying  for  any patents  relating  to  the  content  of  the  
manuscript?
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or  
has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6. Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If  
your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competing interests
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included on my  
report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report including any 
attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' responses. I agree for my 
report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments which I do not wish to 
be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments to the editors, which will not  
be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
Reviewer’s report
Title: Serum D-dimer Levels at Admission for Prediction of Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis
Version: 0 Date: 24 Mar 2019
Reviewer: WQ Li
Reviewer's report:
Early prediction of acute pancreatitis (AP) severity is one of clinical work and research focus. Although  
many studies and various prediction methods have been reported, there is still a long way to go from  
clinical application. This is a good study. First, the sample size is large, and time stratification is carried  
out according to the different time after admission. Second, D-dimer is a test index which has been  
routinely used in clinical practice to facilitate the later clinical application. Although there are some  
articles on D-dimer and AP (including those of our team), I still think this is a good clinical study and  
worth publishing. Of course, there are some problems in the article, which need to be revised.
1. Please utilise the assistance of a Professional English Language editing service - the manuscript  
is ridden with language errors throughout, which distracts readers from the message the authors  
wish to get across.
2. There are several abbreviations used throughout the manuscript without clarifying to the reader  
what they actually mean. One must not assume that the abbreviations used are universally  
accepted, even among pancreatologists. Will the authors please ensure that these are clarified  
throughout the manuscript?
3. Also, if the submitted manuscript is to be revised, I would strongly advise the authors to review  
all their data on AP and strictly classify the severity of AP in their patients as suggested by the  
landmark paper by Banks et al.
4. In the discussion section, please explain the possible mechanism of D-dimer caused aggravation  
of pancreatitis
5. Some percentages in the chart are suggested to be replaced by One decimal post-point.
6. This study is a retrospective study, and a prospective large samples study should be designed to  
verify this conclusion in the future.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an additional  
statistical review?
If  an  additional  statistical  review  is  recommended,  please  specify  what  aspects  require  further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.
I am able to assess the statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation  that  may  in  any  way  gain  or  lose  financially  from  the  publication  of  this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially  
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3. Do  you  hold  or are  you  currently applying  for  any patents  relating  to  the  content  of  the  
manuscript?
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or  
has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6. Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If  
your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competing interests
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included on my  
report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report including any 
attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' responses. I agree for my 
report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments which I do not wish to 
be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments to the editors, which will not  
be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer’s report
Title: Serum D-dimer Levels at Admission for Prediction of Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis
Version: 0 Date: 24 Mar 2019
Reviewer: WQ Li
Reviewer's report:
Early prediction of acute pancreatitis (AP) severity is one of clinical work and research focus. Although  
many studies and various prediction methods have been reported, there is still a long way to go from  
clinical application. This is a good study. First, the sample size is large, and time stratification is carried  
out according to the different time after admission. Second, D-dimer is a test index which has been  
routinely used in clinical practice to facilitate the later clinical application. Although there are some  
articles on D-dimer and AP (including those of our team), I still think this is a good clinical study and  
worth publishing. Of course, there are some problems in the article, which need to be revised.
1. Please utilise the assistance of a Professional English Language editing service - the manuscript  
is ridden with language errors throughout, which distracts readers from the message the authors  
wish to get across.
2. There are several abbreviations used throughout the manuscript without clarifying to the reader  
what they actually mean. One must not assume that the abbreviations used are universally  
accepted, even among pancreatologists. Will the authors please ensure that these are clarified  
throughout the manuscript?
3. Also, if the submitted manuscript is to be revised, I would strongly advise the authors to review  
all their data on AP and strictly classify the severity of AP in their patients as suggested by the  
landmark paper by Banks et al.
4. In the discussion section, please explain the possible mechanism of D-dimer caused aggravation  
of pancreatitis
5. Some percentages in the chart are suggested to be replaced by One decimal post-point.
6. This study is a retrospective study, and a prospective large samples study should be designed to  
verify this conclusion in the future.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an additional  
statistical review?
If  an  additional  statistical  review  is  recommended,  please  specify  what  aspects  require  further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.
I am able to assess the statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation  that  may  in  any  way  gain  or  lose  financially  from  the  publication  of  this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially  
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3. Do  you  hold  or are  you  currently applying  for  any patents  relating  to  the  content  of  the  
manuscript?
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or  
has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6. Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If  
your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competing interests
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included on my  
report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report including any 
attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' responses. I agree for my 
report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments which I do not wish to 
be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments to the editors, which will not  
be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
assistant