Reviewer ’s report  
Title: Classifica tion of pediatric functional gastrointestinal diso rders related to abdominal pain 
using Rome III vs. Rome IV criterions  
 
Version: 1 Date: 25 Dec 2017  
 
Reviewer: Malik Aydin  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is an article outlining the comparison of the Rome criteria fo r irritable bowel syndrome, 
functional dyspepsia and "overlap syndrome". It is a retrospective analysis including 106 
pediatric patients. Due to the daily use of Rome criteria in the clinics, the manuscript is clear - 
and well -described, and the key message s catch the reader.   
 
Some points/questions were as followed:  
 
The introduction is a bit short, focusing firstly at the history of the Rome criteria and then listing 
step by step each criteria following by III and IV with more current literature could be interesting 
here.  
In Methods H. pylori must be written in italic. Please, also reply why you choosed the age range 
of 8 to 17 and not a younger age, for example 5 to 17?  
Results are good presented but I think the data has to be also figured out in graphs (2 graphs 
would be suitable at this point). Please include the absolute numbers in Table 1 and do the 
percentages behind in brackets.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported  by the data shown?  
If no t, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I recommend additional statistical review  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
Acceptable  
Decl aration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is ye s to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publicati on, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4 .0/). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
Title: Classifica tion of pediatric functional gastrointestinal diso rders related to abdominal pain 
using Rome III vs. Rome IV criterions  
 
Version: 1 Date: 25 Dec 2017  
 
Reviewer: Malik Aydin  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is an article outlining the comparison of the Rome criteria fo r irritable bowel syndrome, 
functional dyspepsia and "overlap syndrome". It is a retrospective analysis including 106 
pediatric patients. Due to the daily use of Rome criteria in the clinics, the manuscript is clear - 
and well -described, and the key message s catch the reader.   
 
Some points/questions were as followed:  
 
The introduction is a bit short, focusing firstly at the history of the Rome criteria and then listing 
step by step each criteria following by III and IV with more current literature could be interesting 
here.  
In Methods H. pylori must be written in italic. Please, also reply why you choosed the age range 
of 8 to 17 and not a younger age, for example 5 to 17?  
Results are good presented but I think the data has to be also figured out in graphs (2 graphs 
would be suitable at this point). Please include the absolute numbers in Table 1 and do the 
percentages behind in brackets.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported  by the data shown?  
If no t, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I recommend additional statistical review  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
Acceptable  
Decl aration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is ye s to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publicati on, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4 .0/). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
Title: Classifica tion of pediatric functional gastrointestinal diso rders related to abdominal pain 
using Rome III vs. Rome IV criterions  
 
Version: 1 Date: 25 Dec 2017  
 
Reviewer: Malik Aydin  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is an article outlining the comparison of the Rome criteria fo r irritable bowel syndrome, 
functional dyspepsia and "overlap syndrome". It is a retrospective analysis including 106 
pediatric patients. Due to the daily use of Rome criteria in the clinics, the manuscript is clear - 
and well -described, and the key message s catch the reader.   
 
Some points/questions were as followed:  
 
The introduction is a bit short, focusing firstly at the history of the Rome criteria and then listing 
step by step each criteria following by III and IV with more current literature could be interesting 
here.  
In Methods H. pylori must be written in italic. Please, also reply why you choosed the age range 
of 8 to 17 and not a younger age, for example 5 to 17?  
Results are good presented but I think the data has to be also figured out in graphs (2 graphs 
would be suitable at this point). Please include the absolute numbers in Table 1 and do the 
percentages behind in brackets.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported  by the data shown?  
If no t, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
Yes 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I recommend additional statistical review  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
Acceptable  
Decl aration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is ye s to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publicati on, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4 .0/). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant