Title: A Novel Nomogram to Predict 90-Day Mortality in Patients with Hepatitis B Virus-
Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Some issues should be further addressed.
In the Introduction section, aiming at removing confusion, the definitions of “short- and
medium-term” should be presented as you have explained in the file “up point-to-point”.
The sentence “Furthermore, the main causes of disease were hepatitis C and alcohol, rather than
HBV” is inappropriate, where the words “hepatitis C” should be revised as “hepatitis C virus”.
The sentence “ In addition, the COSSH-ACLF also involves multiple parameters and requires
complex organ failure assessments” seems incorrect. “COSSH-ACLF” should be revised as
“COSSH-ACLFs”.
The sentence “Moreover, we compared this nomogram with the aforementioned prognostic
scoring systems to provide guidance for clinical treatment and decision making” is lacking
of logic. As I understand it, the authors compared this nomogram with the aforementioned
prognostic scoring systems in order to demonstrate the clinical predictive value of this
nomogram.
In the Results section, the authors compared predictive abilities between the nomogram and
other scoring systems in a cohort of 181 HBV-ACLF patients. Why not compare predictive
abilities between the nomogram and other scoring systems in the external validation cohort?
The reasons should be explained.
The sentence “The AUC of the nomogram (0.866) was
approximately comparable to that of the COSSH-ACLFs (0.872) and was better than
that of the CLIF-C ACLF (0.825), CLIF-OFs (0.835), and MELD score (0.665)” is
inappropriately expressed due to the absence of statistical comparison. It is possible to compare
the AUC of different prognostic scoring systems.
Details of Figure 1, for example, the inconsistent spacing of letters between one word, should
be further improved.
Title: A Novel Nomogram to Predict 90-Day Mortality in Patients with Hepatitis B Virus-
Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Some issues should be further addressed.
In the Introduction section, aiming at removing confusion, the definitions of “short- and
medium-term” should be presented as you have explained in the file “up point-to-point”.
The sentence “Furthermore, the main causes of disease were hepatitis C and alcohol, rather than
HBV” is inappropriate, where the words “hepatitis C” should be revised as “hepatitis C virus”.
The sentence “ In addition, the COSSH-ACLF also involves multiple parameters and requires
complex organ failure assessments” seems incorrect. “COSSH-ACLF” should be revised as
“COSSH-ACLFs”.
The sentence “Moreover, we compared this nomogram with the aforementioned prognostic
scoring systems to provide guidance for clinical treatment and decision making” is lacking
of logic. As I understand it, the authors compared this nomogram with the aforementioned
prognostic scoring systems in order to demonstrate the clinical predictive value of this
nomogram.
In the Results section, the authors compared predictive abilities between the nomogram and
other scoring systems in a cohort of 181 HBV-ACLF patients. Why not compare predictive
abilities between the nomogram and other scoring systems in the external validation cohort?
The reasons should be explained.
The sentence “The AUC of the nomogram (0.866) was
approximately comparable to that of the COSSH-ACLFs (0.872) and was better than
that of the CLIF-C ACLF (0.825), CLIF-OFs (0.835), and MELD score (0.665)” is
inappropriately expressed due to the absence of statistical comparison. It is possible to compare
the AUC of different prognostic scoring systems.
Details of Figure 1, for example, the inconsistent spacing of letters between one word, should
be further improved.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A Novel Nomogram to Predict 90-Day Mortality in Patients with Hepatitis B Virus-
Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Some issues should be further addressed.
In the Introduction section, aiming at removing confusion, the definitions of “short- and
medium-term” should be presented as you have explained in the file “up point-to-point”.
The sentence “Furthermore, the main causes of disease were hepatitis C and alcohol, rather than
HBV” is inappropriate, where the words “hepatitis C” should be revised as “hepatitis C virus”.
The sentence “ In addition, the COSSH-ACLF also involves multiple parameters and requires
complex organ failure assessments” seems incorrect. “COSSH-ACLF” should be revised as
“COSSH-ACLFs”.
The sentence “Moreover, we compared this nomogram with the aforementioned prognostic
scoring systems to provide guidance for clinical treatment and decision making” is lacking
of logic. As I understand it, the authors compared this nomogram with the aforementioned
prognostic scoring systems in order to demonstrate the clinical predictive value of this
nomogram.
In the Results section, the authors compared predictive abilities between the nomogram and
other scoring systems in a cohort of 181 HBV-ACLF patients. Why not compare predictive
abilities between the nomogram and other scoring systems in the external validation cohort?
The reasons should be explained.
The sentence “The AUC of the nomogram (0.866) was
approximately comparable to that of the COSSH-ACLFs (0.872) and was better than
that of the CLIF-C ACLF (0.825), CLIF-OFs (0.835), and MELD score (0.665)” is
inappropriately expressed due to the absence of statistical comparison. It is possible to compare
the AUC of different prognostic scoring systems.
Details of Figure 1, for example, the inconsistent spacing of letters between one word, should
be further improved.
assistant