Reviewer's report
Title:Using an oblique incident laser beam to measure the optical properties of
stomach mucosa/submucosa tissue
Version: 4Date:12 December 2008
Reviewer: Landulfo Silveira Jr.
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
It is still found too long paragraphs, for example, the first paragraph at
Introduction could be divided into at least two paragraphs, with the second
paragraph starting at line 11, because authors are telling different things from this
point to the next paragraph. The Discussion has a paragraph with more than 50
lines!
Some general language and format problems can be fixed with a careful reading
by the group’s most expertise English speaker or an English teacher.
To clarify how the delta_x was measured, once it is the basis of the paper, I
recommend to put a diagram or a real CCD image, delimitating the laser beam
circle and the scattered light circle and indicating the delta_x.
Is is still confusing how the delta_x was fitted to the equation, since the output
parameters, such as the mi_a and mi_s’ are all extracted using just one variable,
the delta_x. Our group have already tried to measure such parameters using the
scattered light and we found that the least square fitting is dependent on the
initial guess and other constrains, and authors did not mentioned these initial
conditions or constrains to avoid mistakes in the fitting.
As pointed out by another reviewer, the discussion is still repetitive. Some
phrases indicated the simple presentation of results. The word “obvious” is still
appearing in the Discussion.
In general, the authors provided a little improvement in the text, and the English
and grammar is still a problem.
Minor Essential Revisions
In the Introduction, first paragraph, there are many “and” separating studies and
references, just one “and” should be placed at the last citation.
Authors included a table to indicate the lasers used, but are still repeating all of
them in the text. They need to reduce the text since the table intended to
substitute the text.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Using an oblique incident laser beam to measure the optical properties of
stomach mucosa/submucosa tissue
Version: 4Date:12 December 2008
Reviewer: Landulfo Silveira Jr.
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
It is still found too long paragraphs, for example, the first paragraph at
Introduction could be divided into at least two paragraphs, with the second
paragraph starting at line 11, because authors are telling different things from this
point to the next paragraph. The Discussion has a paragraph with more than 50
lines!
Some general language and format problems can be fixed with a careful reading
by the group’s most expertise English speaker or an English teacher.
To clarify how the delta_x was measured, once it is the basis of the paper, I
recommend to put a diagram or a real CCD image, delimitating the laser beam
circle and the scattered light circle and indicating the delta_x.
Is is still confusing how the delta_x was fitted to the equation, since the output
parameters, such as the mi_a and mi_s’ are all extracted using just one variable,
the delta_x. Our group have already tried to measure such parameters using the
scattered light and we found that the least square fitting is dependent on the
initial guess and other constrains, and authors did not mentioned these initial
conditions or constrains to avoid mistakes in the fitting.
As pointed out by another reviewer, the discussion is still repetitive. Some
phrases indicated the simple presentation of results. The word “obvious” is still
appearing in the Discussion.
In general, the authors provided a little improvement in the text, and the English
and grammar is still a problem.
Minor Essential Revisions
In the Introduction, first paragraph, there are many “and” separating studies and
references, just one “and” should be placed at the last citation.
Authors included a table to indicate the lasers used, but are still repeating all of
them in the text. They need to reduce the text since the table intended to
substitute the text.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Using an oblique incident laser beam to measure the optical properties of
stomach mucosa/submucosa tissue
Version: 4Date:12 December 2008
Reviewer: Landulfo Silveira Jr.
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
It is still found too long paragraphs, for example, the first paragraph at
Introduction could be divided into at least two paragraphs, with the second
paragraph starting at line 11, because authors are telling different things from this
point to the next paragraph. The Discussion has a paragraph with more than 50
lines!
Some general language and format problems can be fixed with a careful reading
by the group’s most expertise English speaker or an English teacher.
To clarify how the delta_x was measured, once it is the basis of the paper, I
recommend to put a diagram or a real CCD image, delimitating the laser beam
circle and the scattered light circle and indicating the delta_x.
Is is still confusing how the delta_x was fitted to the equation, since the output
parameters, such as the mi_a and mi_s’ are all extracted using just one variable,
the delta_x. Our group have already tried to measure such parameters using the
scattered light and we found that the least square fitting is dependent on the
initial guess and other constrains, and authors did not mentioned these initial
conditions or constrains to avoid mistakes in the fitting.
As pointed out by another reviewer, the discussion is still repetitive. Some
phrases indicated the simple presentation of results. The word “obvious” is still
appearing in the Discussion.
In general, the authors provided a little improvement in the text, and the English
and grammar is still a problem.
Minor Essential Revisions
In the Introduction, first paragraph, there are many “and” separating studies and
references, just one “and” should be placed at the last citation.
Authors included a table to indicate the lasers used, but are still repeating all of
them in the text. They need to reduce the text since the table intended to
substitute the text.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant