Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic laparoscopy for assessing resectability in
pancreatic and periampullary cancer
Version:1Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Rakesh Aggarwal
Reviewer's report:
The model and assumptions are not described well. Also, I have an issue with
the basic model (please see the uploaded file). That small discrepancy, if true,
could change the results of this study, in which the gain in QALY per patient was
as small as 0.009 years (<4 days), could change the results drastically. I am also
possibly not the best person to review this person since I am not a surgeon and
hence am not well placed to understand whether the assumptions are valid or
not.
Level of interest An article of importance in its field
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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:Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic laparoscopy for assessing resectability in
pancreatic and periampullary cancer
Version:1Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Rakesh Aggarwal
Reviewer's report:
The model and assumptions are not described well. Also, I have an issue with
the basic model (please see the uploaded file). That small discrepancy, if true,
could change the results of this study, in which the gain in QALY per patient was
as small as 0.009 years (<4 days), could change the results drastically. I am also
possibly not the best person to review this person since I am not a surgeon and
hence am not well placed to understand whether the assumptions are valid or
not.
Level of interest An article of importance in its field
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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:Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic laparoscopy for assessing resectability in
pancreatic and periampullary cancer
Version:1Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Rakesh Aggarwal
Reviewer's report:
The model and assumptions are not described well. Also, I have an issue with
the basic model (please see the uploaded file). That small discrepancy, if true,
could change the results of this study, in which the gain in QALY per patient was
as small as 0.009 years (<4 days), could change the results drastically. I am also
possibly not the best person to review this person since I am not a surgeon and
hence am not well placed to understand whether the assumptions are valid or
not.
Level of interest An article of importance in its field
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
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