Reviewer's report
Title:Etiology of liver cirrhosis does not influence the severity of hepatic
encephalopathy: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1Date:22 August 2008
Reviewer: Giovanni Tarantino
Reviewer's report:
1. Is the question posed by the authors well defined? YES
2. Are the methods appropriate YES
and well described? See below
3. Are the data sound? YES
4. Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data
deposition? YES
5. Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported
by the data? YES
6. Are limitations of the work clearly stated? YES
7. Do the authors clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building,
both published and unpublished? YES
Minor Essential Revisions
The Authors are advised:
1) To change the term “severity” with the term “presence/prevalence” in the title.
2) To start with a general sentence such as “There are scarce and conflicting
data on which type of liver cirrhosis could more frequently induce HE” in the
Background of the Abstract.
3) To eliminate the sentence “diabetes mellitus has been …………..hepatic
encephalopathy” in the Background of the Abstract
4) To put forward the last sentence of the Conclusion in the Abstract “Cirrhosis
etiology…..” and afterward the first one “Cognitive impairment…….”
5) To change “sort” in “short” at page 7 in “Assessment of health………of life” of
Methods.
6) To change “more” in “less” at page 10 in “HE in alcoholic vs cholestasis” of
Results.
- Discretionary Revisions
1)To add, please, in exclusion criteria, when dealing with the patients’ selection,
why cryptogenic cirrhotic patients were excluded. This is the reason for which so
few NASH patients were enrolled.
Anyway, the NASH patients were not taken in consideration also because there
would be a statistical interference due to the presence of insulin resistance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Etiology of liver cirrhosis does not influence the severity of hepatic
encephalopathy: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1Date:22 August 2008
Reviewer: Giovanni Tarantino
Reviewer's report:
1. Is the question posed by the authors well defined? YES
2. Are the methods appropriate YES
and well described? See below
3. Are the data sound? YES
4. Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data
deposition? YES
5. Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported
by the data? YES
6. Are limitations of the work clearly stated? YES
7. Do the authors clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building,
both published and unpublished? YES
Minor Essential Revisions
The Authors are advised:
1) To change the term “severity” with the term “presence/prevalence” in the title.
2) To start with a general sentence such as “There are scarce and conflicting
data on which type of liver cirrhosis could more frequently induce HE” in the
Background of the Abstract.
3) To eliminate the sentence “diabetes mellitus has been …………..hepatic
encephalopathy” in the Background of the Abstract
4) To put forward the last sentence of the Conclusion in the Abstract “Cirrhosis
etiology…..” and afterward the first one “Cognitive impairment…….”
5) To change “sort” in “short” at page 7 in “Assessment of health………of life” of
Methods.
6) To change “more” in “less” at page 10 in “HE in alcoholic vs cholestasis” of
Results.
- Discretionary Revisions
1)To add, please, in exclusion criteria, when dealing with the patients’ selection,
why cryptogenic cirrhotic patients were excluded. This is the reason for which so
few NASH patients were enrolled.
Anyway, the NASH patients were not taken in consideration also because there
would be a statistical interference due to the presence of insulin resistance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Etiology of liver cirrhosis does not influence the severity of hepatic
encephalopathy: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1Date:22 August 2008
Reviewer: Giovanni Tarantino
Reviewer's report:
1. Is the question posed by the authors well defined? YES
2. Are the methods appropriate YES
and well described? See below
3. Are the data sound? YES
4. Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data
deposition? YES
5. Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported
by the data? YES
6. Are limitations of the work clearly stated? YES
7. Do the authors clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building,
both published and unpublished? YES
Minor Essential Revisions
The Authors are advised:
1) To change the term “severity” with the term “presence/prevalence” in the title.
2) To start with a general sentence such as “There are scarce and conflicting
data on which type of liver cirrhosis could more frequently induce HE” in the
Background of the Abstract.
3) To eliminate the sentence “diabetes mellitus has been …………..hepatic
encephalopathy” in the Background of the Abstract
4) To put forward the last sentence of the Conclusion in the Abstract “Cirrhosis
etiology…..” and afterward the first one “Cognitive impairment…….”
5) To change “sort” in “short” at page 7 in “Assessment of health………of life” of
Methods.
6) To change “more” in “less” at page 10 in “HE in alcoholic vs cholestasis” of
Results.
- Discretionary Revisions
1)To add, please, in exclusion criteria, when dealing with the patients’ selection,
why cryptogenic cirrhotic patients were excluded. This is the reason for which so
few NASH patients were enrolled.
Anyway, the NASH patients were not taken in consideration also because there
would be a statistical interference due to the presence of insulin resistance.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant