Title: Relationship between observation time and detection rate of focal lesions in
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a single-center, retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
To the authors.
Thanks for your good research achievement & submission.
In this manuscript, the authors demonstrated that relationship between observation time and
detection rate of focal lesions in EGD: a single-center, retrospective study. Although promising
data were provided, there are several issues that need to be addressed.
Major points
1. The method section states that endoscopists were categorized into fast and slow groups based
on the mean observation time for EGDs without a biopsy. However, in the discussion section,
it mentions that the impact of biopsy time on observation time cannot be eliminated. Please
provide clarification.
2. Regarding Table 1, individuals with a notably high biopsy rate, such as those represented
by number 22 in the fast group and number 13 in the slow group, exhibit a low likelihood of
detecting focal lesions. Can it be inferred that this indicates a substantial number of unnecessary
biopsies?
3. In reference to Table 2, isn't it concerning that the detection rate is low despite the presence
of numerous experts in the Fast group? According to previous reports, experts typically exhibit
a higher detection rate, don't they?
4. In relation to Table 3, concerning cancer, no significant differences were observed in any
organ. However, a higher prevalence of intestinal epithelial metaplasia was identified in the fast
group, which is a crucial finding in terms of gastric cancer risk. Therefore, this outcome does
not necessarily imply that the slow group is superior. Can it be asserted as favorable?
Title: Relationship between observation time and detection rate of focal lesions in
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a single-center, retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
To the authors.
Thanks for your good research achievement & submission.
In this manuscript, the authors demonstrated that relationship between observation time and
detection rate of focal lesions in EGD: a single-center, retrospective study. Although promising
data were provided, there are several issues that need to be addressed.
Major points
1. The method section states that endoscopists were categorized into fast and slow groups based
on the mean observation time for EGDs without a biopsy. However, in the discussion section,
it mentions that the impact of biopsy time on observation time cannot be eliminated. Please
provide clarification.
2. Regarding Table 1, individuals with a notably high biopsy rate, such as those represented
by number 22 in the fast group and number 13 in the slow group, exhibit a low likelihood of
detecting focal lesions. Can it be inferred that this indicates a substantial number of unnecessary
biopsies?
3. In reference to Table 2, isn't it concerning that the detection rate is low despite the presence
of numerous experts in the Fast group? According to previous reports, experts typically exhibit
a higher detection rate, don't they?
4. In relation to Table 3, concerning cancer, no significant differences were observed in any
organ. However, a higher prevalence of intestinal epithelial metaplasia was identified in the fast
group, which is a crucial finding in terms of gastric cancer risk. Therefore, this outcome does
not necessarily imply that the slow group is superior. Can it be asserted as favorable?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Relationship between observation time and detection rate of focal lesions in
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a single-center, retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
To the authors.
Thanks for your good research achievement & submission.
In this manuscript, the authors demonstrated that relationship between observation time and
detection rate of focal lesions in EGD: a single-center, retrospective study. Although promising
data were provided, there are several issues that need to be addressed.
Major points
1. The method section states that endoscopists were categorized into fast and slow groups based
on the mean observation time for EGDs without a biopsy. However, in the discussion section,
it mentions that the impact of biopsy time on observation time cannot be eliminated. Please
provide clarification.
2. Regarding Table 1, individuals with a notably high biopsy rate, such as those represented
by number 22 in the fast group and number 13 in the slow group, exhibit a low likelihood of
detecting focal lesions. Can it be inferred that this indicates a substantial number of unnecessary
biopsies?
3. In reference to Table 2, isn't it concerning that the detection rate is low despite the presence
of numerous experts in the Fast group? According to previous reports, experts typically exhibit
a higher detection rate, don't they?
4. In relation to Table 3, concerning cancer, no significant differences were observed in any
organ. However, a higher prevalence of intestinal epithelial metaplasia was identified in the fast
group, which is a crucial finding in terms of gastric cancer risk. Therefore, this outcome does
not necessarily imply that the slow group is superior. Can it be asserted as favorable?
assistant