Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 5  5 June 2007 Version: Date: 
 John H Kalbfleisch Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
The big issue I have is with the statistical analysis. The authors are still vague 
about their analysis details. Publication of the manuscript would be acceptable 
if the authors address these aspects. 
1) mention the specific kind of analysis of variance that was used, 
2) indicate why that choice is appropriate for the design of their study 
in which 12 animals were measured at different study conditions, and 
3) give stage summary statistics for the comparisons indicated in the 
current Table 3 (as the combination of Table 1 and Table 2 go together). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author 
can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
John H. Kalbfleisch, Ph.D. 
Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 5  5 June 2007 Version: Date: 
 John H Kalbfleisch Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
The big issue I have is with the statistical analysis. The authors are still vague 
about their analysis details. Publication of the manuscript would be acceptable 
if the authors address these aspects. 
1) mention the specific kind of analysis of variance that was used, 
2) indicate why that choice is appropriate for the design of their study 
in which 12 animals were measured at different study conditions, and 
3) give stage summary statistics for the comparisons indicated in the 
current Table 3 (as the combination of Table 1 and Table 2 go together). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author 
can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
John H. Kalbfleisch, Ph.D. 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 5  5 June 2007 Version: Date: 
 John H Kalbfleisch Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
The big issue I have is with the statistical analysis. The authors are still vague 
about their analysis details. Publication of the manuscript would be acceptable 
if the authors address these aspects. 
1) mention the specific kind of analysis of variance that was used, 
2) indicate why that choice is appropriate for the design of their study 
in which 12 animals were measured at different study conditions, and 
3) give stage summary statistics for the comparisons indicated in the 
current Table 3 (as the combination of Table 1 and Table 2 go together). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author 
can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
John H. Kalbfleisch, Ph.D. 
assistant