Reviewer's report
Title:Trends in Liver Transplantation for Primary Biliary Cirrhosis in The
Netherlands 1988-2008
Version: 1Date:13 May 2010
Reviewer: Wolf O Bechstein
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. The manuscript and tables are inconsistent with regard to the time periods
studied and analysed. In the abstract as well as in the Manuscript, the two
decades are stated as 1988-1998 and 1998 - 2008, while in the table the
decades are separated as 1988-1997 and 1998 - 2008. In the "patients and
methods" section the time period is stated as "all patients who underwent LTX in
the Netherlands from January 1988 until January 2008". Either patients in 1998
have been counted twice, which would be a serious flaw, or this is just a misprint.
In any case, two precise decades would be 1.1.1988 - 31.12.1997 and 1.1.1998 -
31.12.2007. Notably, in the figures no case is recorded for 2008.
2. Five patients died on the watiing list, and these only during the second
deacde. Waiting time was longer during the second decade. If the 5 patients that
died had been transplanted, the statistical analysis given the small numbers
would perhaps be different. One might argue that - for whatever reasons - the
health care system during the second decade was not as effective as during the
first decade in delivering liver transplantation to affected individuals with PBC in a
timely manner.
Minor essential revision:
1. Page 5: spell out SBP - spontaneous bacterial peritonitis
Discretionary revisions:
you may consider briefly explaining "Schirmer's Test" e.g.(schirmer's test (for
assesing tear production to diagnose xerophthalmia))
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Trends in Liver Transplantation for Primary Biliary Cirrhosis in The
Netherlands 1988-2008
Version: 1Date:13 May 2010
Reviewer: Wolf O Bechstein
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. The manuscript and tables are inconsistent with regard to the time periods
studied and analysed. In the abstract as well as in the Manuscript, the two
decades are stated as 1988-1998 and 1998 - 2008, while in the table the
decades are separated as 1988-1997 and 1998 - 2008. In the "patients and
methods" section the time period is stated as "all patients who underwent LTX in
the Netherlands from January 1988 until January 2008". Either patients in 1998
have been counted twice, which would be a serious flaw, or this is just a misprint.
In any case, two precise decades would be 1.1.1988 - 31.12.1997 and 1.1.1998 -
31.12.2007. Notably, in the figures no case is recorded for 2008.
2. Five patients died on the watiing list, and these only during the second
deacde. Waiting time was longer during the second decade. If the 5 patients that
died had been transplanted, the statistical analysis given the small numbers
would perhaps be different. One might argue that - for whatever reasons - the
health care system during the second decade was not as effective as during the
first decade in delivering liver transplantation to affected individuals with PBC in a
timely manner.
Minor essential revision:
1. Page 5: spell out SBP - spontaneous bacterial peritonitis
Discretionary revisions:
you may consider briefly explaining "Schirmer's Test" e.g.(schirmer's test (for
assesing tear production to diagnose xerophthalmia))
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Trends in Liver Transplantation for Primary Biliary Cirrhosis in The
Netherlands 1988-2008
Version: 1Date:13 May 2010
Reviewer: Wolf O Bechstein
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. The manuscript and tables are inconsistent with regard to the time periods
studied and analysed. In the abstract as well as in the Manuscript, the two
decades are stated as 1988-1998 and 1998 - 2008, while in the table the
decades are separated as 1988-1997 and 1998 - 2008. In the "patients and
methods" section the time period is stated as "all patients who underwent LTX in
the Netherlands from January 1988 until January 2008". Either patients in 1998
have been counted twice, which would be a serious flaw, or this is just a misprint.
In any case, two precise decades would be 1.1.1988 - 31.12.1997 and 1.1.1998 -
31.12.2007. Notably, in the figures no case is recorded for 2008.
2. Five patients died on the watiing list, and these only during the second
deacde. Waiting time was longer during the second decade. If the 5 patients that
died had been transplanted, the statistical analysis given the small numbers
would perhaps be different. One might argue that - for whatever reasons - the
health care system during the second decade was not as effective as during the
first decade in delivering liver transplantation to affected individuals with PBC in a
timely manner.
Minor essential revision:
1. Page 5: spell out SBP - spontaneous bacterial peritonitis
Discretionary revisions:
you may consider briefly explaining "Schirmer's Test" e.g.(schirmer's test (for
assesing tear production to diagnose xerophthalmia))
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant