Title: Endoscopic treatment for gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey
comparing between developed and developing countries
Version: 2 Date: 12 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments to the Authors:
I appreciate the authors' efforts in revising the manuscript titled "Endoscopic treatment for
gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey comparing between developed and
developing countries." The revisions have addressed most of the concerns raised in the initial
review, and the manuscript has been improved significantly.
1. Abstract: The purpose of the study is now clearly stated, and the emphasis on the sample size
and time frame has been adequately addressed. This provides a clearer context for the reader.
2. Introduction: The addition of more recent statistics and a detailed explanation of the
differences between developed and developing countries has strengthened the rationale for the
study. This section is now more compelling and informative.
3. Methods: The criteria for participant selection and the development process of the survey
have been clarified, which enhances the transparency and reproducibility of the study. However,
additional details regarding the validity and reliability of the survey instrument would further
strengthen this section.
4. Results: The presentation of data in the tables and figures has been improved, making the
results clearer and easier to interpret. However, a more detailed analysis of how the differences
between countries translate into clinical outcomes would still be beneficial.
5. Discussion: The discussion has been enhanced by a deeper analysis of the findings and a more
focused discussion on the clinical implications. The effort to reduce speculative statements is
noted, although there is still room to anchor the conclusions more firmly to the data presented.
Overall, the manuscript has been significantly improved, and most of the major concerns have
been addressed. A few minor revisions remain, particularly in strengthening the methodological
details and further refining the discussion. Therefore, I recommend a minor revision before final
acceptance.
Thank you for your hard work and dedication to improving the manuscript.
Title: Endoscopic treatment for gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey
comparing between developed and developing countries
Version: 2 Date: 12 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments to the Authors:
I appreciate the authors' efforts in revising the manuscript titled "Endoscopic treatment for
gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey comparing between developed and
developing countries." The revisions have addressed most of the concerns raised in the initial
review, and the manuscript has been improved significantly.
1. Abstract: The purpose of the study is now clearly stated, and the emphasis on the sample size
and time frame has been adequately addressed. This provides a clearer context for the reader.
2. Introduction: The addition of more recent statistics and a detailed explanation of the
differences between developed and developing countries has strengthened the rationale for the
study. This section is now more compelling and informative.
3. Methods: The criteria for participant selection and the development process of the survey
have been clarified, which enhances the transparency and reproducibility of the study. However,
additional details regarding the validity and reliability of the survey instrument would further
strengthen this section.
4. Results: The presentation of data in the tables and figures has been improved, making the
results clearer and easier to interpret. However, a more detailed analysis of how the differences
between countries translate into clinical outcomes would still be beneficial.
5. Discussion: The discussion has been enhanced by a deeper analysis of the findings and a more
focused discussion on the clinical implications. The effort to reduce speculative statements is
noted, although there is still room to anchor the conclusions more firmly to the data presented.
Overall, the manuscript has been significantly improved, and most of the major concerns have
been addressed. A few minor revisions remain, particularly in strengthening the methodological
details and further refining the discussion. Therefore, I recommend a minor revision before final
acceptance.
Thank you for your hard work and dedication to improving the manuscript.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Endoscopic treatment for gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey
comparing between developed and developing countries
Version: 2 Date: 12 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments to the Authors:
I appreciate the authors' efforts in revising the manuscript titled "Endoscopic treatment for
gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a survey comparing between developed and
developing countries." The revisions have addressed most of the concerns raised in the initial
review, and the manuscript has been improved significantly.
1. Abstract: The purpose of the study is now clearly stated, and the emphasis on the sample size
and time frame has been adequately addressed. This provides a clearer context for the reader.
2. Introduction: The addition of more recent statistics and a detailed explanation of the
differences between developed and developing countries has strengthened the rationale for the
study. This section is now more compelling and informative.
3. Methods: The criteria for participant selection and the development process of the survey
have been clarified, which enhances the transparency and reproducibility of the study. However,
additional details regarding the validity and reliability of the survey instrument would further
strengthen this section.
4. Results: The presentation of data in the tables and figures has been improved, making the
results clearer and easier to interpret. However, a more detailed analysis of how the differences
between countries translate into clinical outcomes would still be beneficial.
5. Discussion: The discussion has been enhanced by a deeper analysis of the findings and a more
focused discussion on the clinical implications. The effort to reduce speculative statements is
noted, although there is still room to anchor the conclusions more firmly to the data presented.
Overall, the manuscript has been significantly improved, and most of the major concerns have
been addressed. A few minor revisions remain, particularly in strengthening the methodological
details and further refining the discussion. Therefore, I recommend a minor revision before final
acceptance.
Thank you for your hard work and dedication to improving the manuscript.
assistant