Reviewer's report
Title:Narrow-band imaging does not improve detection of colorectal polyps
when compared to conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial and
meta-analysis of published studies.
Version: 4Date:10 February 2011
Reviewer: Mainor R Antillon
Reviewer's report:
I am having problem understanding the actual polyp/adenoma detection rates
Page 10 paragraph 3 the author report an overall polyp detection of 36.1 % but in
page 12, last sentence reports 37%. Which one is it?
Page 10, paragraph 3 needs to be revised and the numbers/percentages need to
match.
53.1 %, 36.8% and 6.89 % do not make 100%.
What were the withdrawal times in page 13. There is plenty of evidence that
withdrawal times as a surrogate correlated to adenoma detection rates.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I am a consultant for Olympus America
Reviewer's report
Title:Narrow-band imaging does not improve detection of colorectal polyps
when compared to conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial and
meta-analysis of published studies.
Version: 4Date:10 February 2011
Reviewer: Mainor R Antillon
Reviewer's report:
I am having problem understanding the actual polyp/adenoma detection rates
Page 10 paragraph 3 the author report an overall polyp detection of 36.1 % but in
page 12, last sentence reports 37%. Which one is it?
Page 10, paragraph 3 needs to be revised and the numbers/percentages need to
match.
53.1 %, 36.8% and 6.89 % do not make 100%.
What were the withdrawal times in page 13. There is plenty of evidence that
withdrawal times as a surrogate correlated to adenoma detection rates.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I am a consultant for Olympus America
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Narrow-band imaging does not improve detection of colorectal polyps
when compared to conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial and
meta-analysis of published studies.
Version: 4Date:10 February 2011
Reviewer: Mainor R Antillon
Reviewer's report:
I am having problem understanding the actual polyp/adenoma detection rates
Page 10 paragraph 3 the author report an overall polyp detection of 36.1 % but in
page 12, last sentence reports 37%. Which one is it?
Page 10, paragraph 3 needs to be revised and the numbers/percentages need to
match.
53.1 %, 36.8% and 6.89 % do not make 100%.
What were the withdrawal times in page 13. There is plenty of evidence that
withdrawal times as a surrogate correlated to adenoma detection rates.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I am a consultant for Olympus America
assistant