Reviewer's report
Title:Association of a probiotic to a Helicobacter pylori eradication regimen does
not increase efficacy or decreases the adverse effects of the treatment: a
prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Version: 2Date:6 September 2012
Reviewer: Marco Manfredi
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The English language is poor and often twisted with several grammatical errors.
Before considering the manuscript for the publication, it requires a full and careful
linguistic revision.
Despite this, the project study is interesting.
The authors used a second-line therapy not a rescue therapy which is used when
at least two treatment regimens failed.
It isn't clear if patients with peptic ulcer have the gastric or duodenal ulcer: it is
different both in prognosis and in follow-up.
The authors did not specify the amount of each probiotic and how the acidified
milk was obtained.
They have to reorganize the manuscript, trying to make easier to understand
each paragrah also about the presentation of data.
The references are old and often lacking of publication year.
The CI in the table must be reversed: (eg. 81-99, not 99-81-table 2)
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Association of a probiotic to a Helicobacter pylori eradication regimen does
not increase efficacy or decreases the adverse effects of the treatment: a
prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Version: 2Date:6 September 2012
Reviewer: Marco Manfredi
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The English language is poor and often twisted with several grammatical errors.
Before considering the manuscript for the publication, it requires a full and careful
linguistic revision.
Despite this, the project study is interesting.
The authors used a second-line therapy not a rescue therapy which is used when
at least two treatment regimens failed.
It isn't clear if patients with peptic ulcer have the gastric or duodenal ulcer: it is
different both in prognosis and in follow-up.
The authors did not specify the amount of each probiotic and how the acidified
milk was obtained.
They have to reorganize the manuscript, trying to make easier to understand
each paragrah also about the presentation of data.
The references are old and often lacking of publication year.
The CI in the table must be reversed: (eg. 81-99, not 99-81-table 2)
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Association of a probiotic to a Helicobacter pylori eradication regimen does
not increase efficacy or decreases the adverse effects of the treatment: a
prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Version: 2Date:6 September 2012
Reviewer: Marco Manfredi
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The English language is poor and often twisted with several grammatical errors.
Before considering the manuscript for the publication, it requires a full and careful
linguistic revision.
Despite this, the project study is interesting.
The authors used a second-line therapy not a rescue therapy which is used when
at least two treatment regimens failed.
It isn't clear if patients with peptic ulcer have the gastric or duodenal ulcer: it is
different both in prognosis and in follow-up.
The authors did not specify the amount of each probiotic and how the acidified
milk was obtained.
They have to reorganize the manuscript, trying to make easier to understand
each paragrah also about the presentation of data.
The references are old and often lacking of publication year.
The CI in the table must be reversed: (eg. 81-99, not 99-81-table 2)
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant