Title: Frequency, outcomes, and need for intervention in stricturing gastrointestinal
tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 1 Date: 22 Jul 2022
Reviewer's report:
1. The title and abstract cover the main aspect of the systematic review.
2. The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study.
3.The definition of study population (abdominal TB or intestinal TB or both) is not unclear, the
author need to make an specific explanation.
4.The criterion of clinical response and stricture response after ATT is yet not unclear, author
should be write in detail and the reference should be included.
5.What are standards for the patients of intervention required in stricturing GITB i.e surgery or
endoscopic dilatation? It is not unclear in the paper.
6.The results are some novels, but the study does not provide a good evidence-based the clinic
data. So there are certain limitations to the systematic review.
7. The findings described by the author correlate with the results and the findings are relevant.
8. “However, we could not analyse the frequency of the involvement of various sites and
response to ATT because of variable definitions of site and lack of data regarding response” and
“It is unclear if preoperative evaluation using imaging could differentiate inflammatory strictures
from fibrotic strictures and therefore predict response to ATT.” --This paragraph should be
placed in the limitations section.
9. The conclusions correlate to the results found.
Title: Frequency, outcomes, and need for intervention in stricturing gastrointestinal
tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 1 Date: 22 Jul 2022
Reviewer's report:
1. The title and abstract cover the main aspect of the systematic review.
2. The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study.
3.The definition of study population (abdominal TB or intestinal TB or both) is not unclear, the
author need to make an specific explanation.
4.The criterion of clinical response and stricture response after ATT is yet not unclear, author
should be write in detail and the reference should be included.
5.What are standards for the patients of intervention required in stricturing GITB i.e surgery or
endoscopic dilatation? It is not unclear in the paper.
6.The results are some novels, but the study does not provide a good evidence-based the clinic
data. So there are certain limitations to the systematic review.
7. The findings described by the author correlate with the results and the findings are relevant.
8. “However, we could not analyse the frequency of the involvement of various sites and
response to ATT because of variable definitions of site and lack of data regarding response” and
“It is unclear if preoperative evaluation using imaging could differentiate inflammatory strictures
from fibrotic strictures and therefore predict response to ATT.” --This paragraph should be
placed in the limitations section.
9. The conclusions correlate to the results found.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Frequency, outcomes, and need for intervention in stricturing gastrointestinal
tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Version: 1 Date: 22 Jul 2022
Reviewer's report:
1. The title and abstract cover the main aspect of the systematic review.
2. The introduction provide background and information relevant to the study.
3.The definition of study population (abdominal TB or intestinal TB or both) is not unclear, the
author need to make an specific explanation.
4.The criterion of clinical response and stricture response after ATT is yet not unclear, author
should be write in detail and the reference should be included.
5.What are standards for the patients of intervention required in stricturing GITB i.e surgery or
endoscopic dilatation? It is not unclear in the paper.
6.The results are some novels, but the study does not provide a good evidence-based the clinic
data. So there are certain limitations to the systematic review.
7. The findings described by the author correlate with the results and the findings are relevant.
8. “However, we could not analyse the frequency of the involvement of various sites and
response to ATT because of variable definitions of site and lack of data regarding response” and
“It is unclear if preoperative evaluation using imaging could differentiate inflammatory strictures
from fibrotic strictures and therefore predict response to ATT.” --This paragraph should be
placed in the limitations section.
9. The conclusions correlate to the results found.
assistant