Title: Long-term Quality of Life After Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-
Analysis
Version: 2 Date: 13 May 2025
Reviewer:  Karunia Valeriani Japar
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript appears to be a scientific study, possibly a meta-analysis or systematic review,
focusing on the incidence rate and characteristics of a medical condition, with references
to statistical results (e.g., "estimated incidence rate of 12% (Table 3)", "I2=91%, P for
heterogeneity#0.00001") and inclusion of study tables (e.g., "Table 2 Study characteristics of
included studies"). However, the extracted content is highly fragmented, with many sections
missing or displayed as isolated numbers, table references, and incomplete sentences. This
makes a comprehensive evaluation challenging.
Strengths
The manuscript includes statistical analysis, such as incidence rates and heterogeneity measures,
suggesting a quantitative approach.
There is acknowledgment of funding and editorial assistance, indicating transparency in
reporting.
The inclusion of tables summarizing study characteristics is appropriate for a review or meta-
analysis.
Major Concerns
Coherence and Structure: The provided text is disjointed, with large gaps and isolated data
points. Key sections such as Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion are either missing
or not clearly delineated.
Incomplete Data Presentation: References to tables (e.g., Table 2, Table 3) are present, but
the actual data or summaries are not visible. This impedes assessment of the robustness of the
findings.
Statistical Clarity: While some statistical values are mentioned (e.g., I2=91%), their context and
interpretation are absent. The manuscript should clearly explain the meaning and implications
of these statistics for the reader.
Language and Formatting: The document contains numerous blank lines and fragmented
sentences, which detract from readability and professionalism.
Minor Concerns
Contact Information: The presence of author contact details at the beginning is unnecessary
for the main manuscript and should be moved to the appropriate section (e.g., title page or
acknowledgments).
Acknowledgments: The acknowledgment of Medjaden Inc. for scientific editing is appropriate,
but it should be placed at the end of the manuscript.
Recommendations
Ensure the manuscript is complete and properly formatted before submission. All standard
sections (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, References) should
be present and clearly labeled.
Present all tables and figures within the manuscript or as supplementary material, with clear
legends and references in the text.
Provide a clear narrative linking the statistical findings to the study objectives and conclusions.
Revise the manuscript for coherence, grammar, and style to meet the standards of a scientific
journal.
Conclusion
Substantial revisions are required to improve the clarity, completeness, and scientific rigor of
the manuscript. The current version lacks sufficient information for a full peer review. The
authors should address the above concerns and resubmit a complete, well-organized manuscript
for further consideration
Title: Long-term Quality of Life After Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-
Analysis
Version: 2 Date: 13 May 2025
Reviewer:  Karunia Valeriani Japar
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript appears to be a scientific study, possibly a meta-analysis or systematic review,
focusing on the incidence rate and characteristics of a medical condition, with references
to statistical results (e.g., "estimated incidence rate of 12% (Table 3)", "I2=91%, P for
heterogeneity#0.00001") and inclusion of study tables (e.g., "Table 2 Study characteristics of
included studies"). However, the extracted content is highly fragmented, with many sections
missing or displayed as isolated numbers, table references, and incomplete sentences. This
makes a comprehensive evaluation challenging.
Strengths
The manuscript includes statistical analysis, such as incidence rates and heterogeneity measures,
suggesting a quantitative approach.
There is acknowledgment of funding and editorial assistance, indicating transparency in
reporting.
The inclusion of tables summarizing study characteristics is appropriate for a review or meta-
analysis.
Major Concerns
Coherence and Structure: The provided text is disjointed, with large gaps and isolated data
points. Key sections such as Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion are either missing
or not clearly delineated.
Incomplete Data Presentation: References to tables (e.g., Table 2, Table 3) are present, but
the actual data or summaries are not visible. This impedes assessment of the robustness of the
findings.
Statistical Clarity: While some statistical values are mentioned (e.g., I2=91%), their context and
interpretation are absent. The manuscript should clearly explain the meaning and implications
of these statistics for the reader.
Language and Formatting: The document contains numerous blank lines and fragmented
sentences, which detract from readability and professionalism.
Minor Concerns
Contact Information: The presence of author contact details at the beginning is unnecessary
for the main manuscript and should be moved to the appropriate section (e.g., title page or
acknowledgments).
Acknowledgments: The acknowledgment of Medjaden Inc. for scientific editing is appropriate,
but it should be placed at the end of the manuscript.
Recommendations
Ensure the manuscript is complete and properly formatted before submission. All standard
sections (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, References) should
be present and clearly labeled.
Present all tables and figures within the manuscript or as supplementary material, with clear
legends and references in the text.
Provide a clear narrative linking the statistical findings to the study objectives and conclusions.
Revise the manuscript for coherence, grammar, and style to meet the standards of a scientific
journal.
Conclusion
Substantial revisions are required to improve the clarity, completeness, and scientific rigor of
the manuscript. The current version lacks sufficient information for a full peer review. The
authors should address the above concerns and resubmit a complete, well-organized manuscript
for further consideration
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Long-term Quality of Life After Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-
Analysis
Version: 2 Date: 13 May 2025
Reviewer:  Karunia Valeriani Japar
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript appears to be a scientific study, possibly a meta-analysis or systematic review,
focusing on the incidence rate and characteristics of a medical condition, with references
to statistical results (e.g., "estimated incidence rate of 12% (Table 3)", "I2=91%, P for
heterogeneity#0.00001") and inclusion of study tables (e.g., "Table 2 Study characteristics of
included studies"). However, the extracted content is highly fragmented, with many sections
missing or displayed as isolated numbers, table references, and incomplete sentences. This
makes a comprehensive evaluation challenging.
Strengths
The manuscript includes statistical analysis, such as incidence rates and heterogeneity measures,
suggesting a quantitative approach.
There is acknowledgment of funding and editorial assistance, indicating transparency in
reporting.
The inclusion of tables summarizing study characteristics is appropriate for a review or meta-
analysis.
Major Concerns
Coherence and Structure: The provided text is disjointed, with large gaps and isolated data
points. Key sections such as Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion are either missing
or not clearly delineated.
Incomplete Data Presentation: References to tables (e.g., Table 2, Table 3) are present, but
the actual data or summaries are not visible. This impedes assessment of the robustness of the
findings.
Statistical Clarity: While some statistical values are mentioned (e.g., I2=91%), their context and
interpretation are absent. The manuscript should clearly explain the meaning and implications
of these statistics for the reader.
Language and Formatting: The document contains numerous blank lines and fragmented
sentences, which detract from readability and professionalism.
Minor Concerns
Contact Information: The presence of author contact details at the beginning is unnecessary
for the main manuscript and should be moved to the appropriate section (e.g., title page or
acknowledgments).
Acknowledgments: The acknowledgment of Medjaden Inc. for scientific editing is appropriate,
but it should be placed at the end of the manuscript.
Recommendations
Ensure the manuscript is complete and properly formatted before submission. All standard
sections (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, References) should
be present and clearly labeled.
Present all tables and figures within the manuscript or as supplementary material, with clear
legends and references in the text.
Provide a clear narrative linking the statistical findings to the study objectives and conclusions.
Revise the manuscript for coherence, grammar, and style to meet the standards of a scientific
journal.
Conclusion
Substantial revisions are required to improve the clarity, completeness, and scientific rigor of
the manuscript. The current version lacks sufficient information for a full peer review. The
authors should address the above concerns and resubmit a complete, well-organized manuscript
for further consideration
assistant