Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 04 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
The authors submit their original work to explore the relationship between FMT in treating IBS
based on global improvement of IBS symptoms between FMT and placebo. The authors found
inconsistent results which will need further investigation. I would like to thank the authors for
their hard work on submitting this manuscript to BMC Gastroenterology and I enjoyed reading
their outcomes. Their hard work is admirable. While I do think the current work may be worthy
of publication as this type of comparison has rarely been done before based on my literature
search, I would recommend the authors address the major issues listed below before further
consideration.
Overall:
There are major grammatical errors throughout the entire manuscript. Please revise and check
the entire manuscript be written in past tense.
Methods:
The authors did not use PRISMA guidelines which is essential for the literature review and meta
analysis. Can the authors please go back and make sure they follow PRISMA guidelines when
screening for included studies?
The authors should include a quality assessment tool for each included study. Please
use NIS study quality assessment tool: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-
assessment-tools for quality of studies rating. The risk of bias is not adequately sufficient in
this context.
Again, I applaud the authors for their hard work. I look forward to reading the revised
manuscript.
Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 04 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
The authors submit their original work to explore the relationship between FMT in treating IBS
based on global improvement of IBS symptoms between FMT and placebo. The authors found
inconsistent results which will need further investigation. I would like to thank the authors for
their hard work on submitting this manuscript to BMC Gastroenterology and I enjoyed reading
their outcomes. Their hard work is admirable. While I do think the current work may be worthy
of publication as this type of comparison has rarely been done before based on my literature
search, I would recommend the authors address the major issues listed below before further
consideration.
Overall:
There are major grammatical errors throughout the entire manuscript. Please revise and check
the entire manuscript be written in past tense.
Methods:
The authors did not use PRISMA guidelines which is essential for the literature review and meta
analysis. Can the authors please go back and make sure they follow PRISMA guidelines when
screening for included studies?
The authors should include a quality assessment tool for each included study. Please
use NIS study quality assessment tool: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-
assessment-tools for quality of studies rating. The risk of bias is not adequately sufficient in
this context.
Again, I applaud the authors for their hard work. I look forward to reading the revised
manuscript.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fecal
Microbiota Transplantation for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Version: 4 Date: 04 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
The authors submit their original work to explore the relationship between FMT in treating IBS
based on global improvement of IBS symptoms between FMT and placebo. The authors found
inconsistent results which will need further investigation. I would like to thank the authors for
their hard work on submitting this manuscript to BMC Gastroenterology and I enjoyed reading
their outcomes. Their hard work is admirable. While I do think the current work may be worthy
of publication as this type of comparison has rarely been done before based on my literature
search, I would recommend the authors address the major issues listed below before further
consideration.
Overall:
There are major grammatical errors throughout the entire manuscript. Please revise and check
the entire manuscript be written in past tense.
Methods:
The authors did not use PRISMA guidelines which is essential for the literature review and meta
analysis. Can the authors please go back and make sure they follow PRISMA guidelines when
screening for included studies?
The authors should include a quality assessment tool for each included study. Please
use NIS study quality assessment tool: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-
assessment-tools for quality of studies rating. The risk of bias is not adequately sufficient in
this context.
Again, I applaud the authors for their hard work. I look forward to reading the revised
manuscript.
assistant