Title: The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) in a National
China Multicenter Cohort of Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Overlapping
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Version: 1 Date: 02 Apr 2024
Reviewer:  Yurong Tang
Reviewer's report:
This work included 341 IBS patients of 20 comprehensive tertiary hospitals across China and
employed Diagnostic Criteria For Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) for evaluating
psychosomatic symptoms. The sample is relatively big and representative for China and DCPR-
R is a brand new and robust tool to measure individuals’ psychosomatic state, which is the bright
spot of this research. However, some issues need to be addressed as below.
1. If a phrase has been presented as an abbreviation mentioned above, the following same
expression can be dictated as the abbreviation#not the detailed phrase.
2. There are some mistakes of singular and plural words as well as some improper English
expressions. Please check the whole manuscript carefully and polish the language by native
English speaker.
3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Did patients with overlapping GERD symptoms undergo
endoscopy to exclude some esophagus or stomach diseases?
4. Detailed results in Result 1 (Table1) and 2 (Table 2) need to be adjusted to some degree.
General characteristics should be presented in Result 1 and Comparison of DCPR-R is
recommended to put in Result 2, then the results will be more readable.
5. Result 2: IBS subtype distribution and IBS severity score need to be added in Table 2. Are
IBS subtype distribution and severity comparable/the same between two groups? As the above
factors may affect patients' psychosomatic symptoms and well-being and then make the results
inaccurate.
6. Result 3: Before multifactorial logistic regression, single factor related analysis was
recommended to find the key factors and then main factors are included in multifactorial
logistic regression. That will be more reasonable. Besides, IBS symptoms are key players in
mental health, psychosomatic manifestations and quality of life. The effect of IBS symptoms on
different questionnaires may be of interest. Different IBS symptoms and severity also need to
be involved in multifactorial logistic regression.
7. Result 3: It was shown that "in patients with IBS alone, the WHO-5 well-being index and PSI
well-being scores were independent predictors of having at least two of the DCPR-R syndromes;
whereas in the overlapping syndromes patients, the PSSS score was an independent predictor."
What is the exact meaning or value of this finding? It should be explained/clarified or it is a
little bit confusing.
8. The discussion section is redundant. The first four paragraph need to be shortened and the
key results should be presented at first. This part should highlight the advantages of the study
and put emphasis on the clinical value of this research's findings.
9. This study's results are limited and over simple. Can you divide the patients according to other
criteria (e.g. IBS subtypes#IBS course#IBS severity#different gender or age, sleep quality, etc)
to carry out some subgroup analyses? I think that will enrich your findings and may help find
other useful risk factors for DCPR-R syndromes.
Title: The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) in a National
China Multicenter Cohort of Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Overlapping
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Version: 1 Date: 02 Apr 2024
Reviewer:  Yurong Tang
Reviewer's report:
This work included 341 IBS patients of 20 comprehensive tertiary hospitals across China and
employed Diagnostic Criteria For Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) for evaluating
psychosomatic symptoms. The sample is relatively big and representative for China and DCPR-
R is a brand new and robust tool to measure individuals’ psychosomatic state, which is the bright
spot of this research. However, some issues need to be addressed as below.
1. If a phrase has been presented as an abbreviation mentioned above, the following same
expression can be dictated as the abbreviation#not the detailed phrase.
2. There are some mistakes of singular and plural words as well as some improper English
expressions. Please check the whole manuscript carefully and polish the language by native
English speaker.
3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Did patients with overlapping GERD symptoms undergo
endoscopy to exclude some esophagus or stomach diseases?
4. Detailed results in Result 1 (Table1) and 2 (Table 2) need to be adjusted to some degree.
General characteristics should be presented in Result 1 and Comparison of DCPR-R is
recommended to put in Result 2, then the results will be more readable.
5. Result 2: IBS subtype distribution and IBS severity score need to be added in Table 2. Are
IBS subtype distribution and severity comparable/the same between two groups? As the above
factors may affect patients' psychosomatic symptoms and well-being and then make the results
inaccurate.
6. Result 3: Before multifactorial logistic regression, single factor related analysis was
recommended to find the key factors and then main factors are included in multifactorial
logistic regression. That will be more reasonable. Besides, IBS symptoms are key players in
mental health, psychosomatic manifestations and quality of life. The effect of IBS symptoms on
different questionnaires may be of interest. Different IBS symptoms and severity also need to
be involved in multifactorial logistic regression.
7. Result 3: It was shown that "in patients with IBS alone, the WHO-5 well-being index and PSI
well-being scores were independent predictors of having at least two of the DCPR-R syndromes;
whereas in the overlapping syndromes patients, the PSSS score was an independent predictor."
What is the exact meaning or value of this finding? It should be explained/clarified or it is a
little bit confusing.
8. The discussion section is redundant. The first four paragraph need to be shortened and the
key results should be presented at first. This part should highlight the advantages of the study
and put emphasis on the clinical value of this research's findings.
9. This study's results are limited and over simple. Can you divide the patients according to other
criteria (e.g. IBS subtypes#IBS course#IBS severity#different gender or age, sleep quality, etc)
to carry out some subgroup analyses? I think that will enrich your findings and may help find
other useful risk factors for DCPR-R syndromes.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) in a National
China Multicenter Cohort of Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Overlapping
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Version: 1 Date: 02 Apr 2024
Reviewer:  Yurong Tang
Reviewer's report:
This work included 341 IBS patients of 20 comprehensive tertiary hospitals across China and
employed Diagnostic Criteria For Psychosomatic Research-Revised (DCPR-R) for evaluating
psychosomatic symptoms. The sample is relatively big and representative for China and DCPR-
R is a brand new and robust tool to measure individuals’ psychosomatic state, which is the bright
spot of this research. However, some issues need to be addressed as below.
1. If a phrase has been presented as an abbreviation mentioned above, the following same
expression can be dictated as the abbreviation#not the detailed phrase.
2. There are some mistakes of singular and plural words as well as some improper English
expressions. Please check the whole manuscript carefully and polish the language by native
English speaker.
3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Did patients with overlapping GERD symptoms undergo
endoscopy to exclude some esophagus or stomach diseases?
4. Detailed results in Result 1 (Table1) and 2 (Table 2) need to be adjusted to some degree.
General characteristics should be presented in Result 1 and Comparison of DCPR-R is
recommended to put in Result 2, then the results will be more readable.
5. Result 2: IBS subtype distribution and IBS severity score need to be added in Table 2. Are
IBS subtype distribution and severity comparable/the same between two groups? As the above
factors may affect patients' psychosomatic symptoms and well-being and then make the results
inaccurate.
6. Result 3: Before multifactorial logistic regression, single factor related analysis was
recommended to find the key factors and then main factors are included in multifactorial
logistic regression. That will be more reasonable. Besides, IBS symptoms are key players in
mental health, psychosomatic manifestations and quality of life. The effect of IBS symptoms on
different questionnaires may be of interest. Different IBS symptoms and severity also need to
be involved in multifactorial logistic regression.
7. Result 3: It was shown that "in patients with IBS alone, the WHO-5 well-being index and PSI
well-being scores were independent predictors of having at least two of the DCPR-R syndromes;
whereas in the overlapping syndromes patients, the PSSS score was an independent predictor."
What is the exact meaning or value of this finding? It should be explained/clarified or it is a
little bit confusing.
8. The discussion section is redundant. The first four paragraph need to be shortened and the
key results should be presented at first. This part should highlight the advantages of the study
and put emphasis on the clinical value of this research's findings.
9. This study's results are limited and over simple. Can you divide the patients according to other
criteria (e.g. IBS subtypes#IBS course#IBS severity#different gender or age, sleep quality, etc)
to carry out some subgroup analyses? I think that will enrich your findings and may help find
other useful risk factors for DCPR-R syndromes.
assistant