Title: Prognostic significance of the Naples prognostic score in colorectal cancer patients
undergoing curative resection: A propensity score matching analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for submitting your report.
This report shows clearly that  NPS is significantly better than other indicators.
Although there were no significant differences between the two groups after PSM in this paper,
it would be better to comprehensively include covariates for PSM that may have an impact on
prognosis (such as TNM) in addition to those that differ between the two groups.
It offers good results, but there are a few things I would like to confirm or question.
#1 Please add the standardized difference in table2 (in order to evaluate propensity score
matching)
Title: Prognostic significance of the Naples prognostic score in colorectal cancer patients
undergoing curative resection: A propensity score matching analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for submitting your report.
This report shows clearly that  NPS is significantly better than other indicators.
Although there were no significant differences between the two groups after PSM in this paper,
it would be better to comprehensively include covariates for PSM that may have an impact on
prognosis (such as TNM) in addition to those that differ between the two groups.
It offers good results, but there are a few things I would like to confirm or question.
#1 Please add the standardized difference in table2 (in order to evaluate propensity score
matching)
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Prognostic significance of the Naples prognostic score in colorectal cancer patients
undergoing curative resection: A propensity score matching analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for submitting your report.
This report shows clearly that  NPS is significantly better than other indicators.
Although there were no significant differences between the two groups after PSM in this paper,
it would be better to comprehensively include covariates for PSM that may have an impact on
prognosis (such as TNM) in addition to those that differ between the two groups.
It offers good results, but there are a few things I would like to confirm or question.
#1 Please add the standardized difference in table2 (in order to evaluate propensity score
matching)
assistant