Title: Diagnostic performance of the normal range of gastrin calculated using strict criteria
based on a combination of serum markers and pathological evaluation for detecting gastritis: a
retrospective study
Version: 0 Date: 06 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a study investigating normal range of serum gastrin based on the strict criteria of
non-gastritis normal subjects. The study design, methods, results, and interpretation are good.
However, the presentation is not good. Abstract is also bad.
Major points
1. Tables 3 and 4 are inserted in the manuscript, but Tables 1 and 2 are added at the end of the
manuscript. In addition, Tables should be uploaded in comfortable format for readers because
the presented tables are not comfortable to see.
2. The purpose of the study is not described well in Introduction and the readers cannot
understand the purpose until later. On the other hand, the readers finally understand the purpose
of the study when they read Discussion. Authors should move a lot of sentences in Discussion
to Introduction.
3. Abstract should be completely changed because it is very hard to understand the study.
4. Line 26-18: The meanings of the sentences are hard to understand.
5. Line 32: “populations” may be better changed to “groups”.
6. Line 169-170: “no gastritis in endoscopy” is not included in the table.
7. Line 226-228: This sentence is for endoscopy group, but the description is complicated. The
readers may misunderstand.
8. Line 232-233: there are no data about this sentence.
9. Line 233-234: PG I and II may be mistaken by each other.
10. Line 273: is “atrophic” necessary?
11. Line 309: “specificity” may be “sensitivity”.
12. Table 1: (G0/G1-3) should be explained.
13. Table 4: what is the cut-off value between high and low gastrin?
14. Supplementary figure 1: This figure is very hard to understand. Presentation should be
improved.
Title: Diagnostic performance of the normal range of gastrin calculated using strict criteria
based on a combination of serum markers and pathological evaluation for detecting gastritis: a
retrospective study
Version: 0 Date: 06 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a study investigating normal range of serum gastrin based on the strict criteria of
non-gastritis normal subjects. The study design, methods, results, and interpretation are good.
However, the presentation is not good. Abstract is also bad.
Major points
1. Tables 3 and 4 are inserted in the manuscript, but Tables 1 and 2 are added at the end of the
manuscript. In addition, Tables should be uploaded in comfortable format for readers because
the presented tables are not comfortable to see.
2. The purpose of the study is not described well in Introduction and the readers cannot
understand the purpose until later. On the other hand, the readers finally understand the purpose
of the study when they read Discussion. Authors should move a lot of sentences in Discussion
to Introduction.
3. Abstract should be completely changed because it is very hard to understand the study.
4. Line 26-18: The meanings of the sentences are hard to understand.
5. Line 32: “populations” may be better changed to “groups”.
6. Line 169-170: “no gastritis in endoscopy” is not included in the table.
7. Line 226-228: This sentence is for endoscopy group, but the description is complicated. The
readers may misunderstand.
8. Line 232-233: there are no data about this sentence.
9. Line 233-234: PG I and II may be mistaken by each other.
10. Line 273: is “atrophic” necessary?
11. Line 309: “specificity” may be “sensitivity”.
12. Table 1: (G0/G1-3) should be explained.
13. Table 4: what is the cut-off value between high and low gastrin?
14. Supplementary figure 1: This figure is very hard to understand. Presentation should be
improved.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Diagnostic performance of the normal range of gastrin calculated using strict criteria
based on a combination of serum markers and pathological evaluation for detecting gastritis: a
retrospective study
Version: 0 Date: 06 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a study investigating normal range of serum gastrin based on the strict criteria of
non-gastritis normal subjects. The study design, methods, results, and interpretation are good.
However, the presentation is not good. Abstract is also bad.
Major points
1. Tables 3 and 4 are inserted in the manuscript, but Tables 1 and 2 are added at the end of the
manuscript. In addition, Tables should be uploaded in comfortable format for readers because
the presented tables are not comfortable to see.
2. The purpose of the study is not described well in Introduction and the readers cannot
understand the purpose until later. On the other hand, the readers finally understand the purpose
of the study when they read Discussion. Authors should move a lot of sentences in Discussion
to Introduction.
3. Abstract should be completely changed because it is very hard to understand the study.
4. Line 26-18: The meanings of the sentences are hard to understand.
5. Line 32: “populations” may be better changed to “groups”.
6. Line 169-170: “no gastritis in endoscopy” is not included in the table.
7. Line 226-228: This sentence is for endoscopy group, but the description is complicated. The
readers may misunderstand.
8. Line 232-233: there are no data about this sentence.
9. Line 233-234: PG I and II may be mistaken by each other.
10. Line 273: is “atrophic” necessary?
11. Line 309: “specificity” may be “sensitivity”.
12. Table 1: (G0/G1-3) should be explained.
13. Table 4: what is the cut-off value between high and low gastrin?
14. Supplementary figure 1: This figure is very hard to understand. Presentation should be
improved.
assistant