Datasets:
relative_rank
int64 0
0
| win_prob
float64 0
0
| title
stringlengths 32
37
| abstract
stringclasses 1
value | full_text
stringlengths 107
36.7k
| review
stringlengths 107
36.7k
| source
stringclasses 1
value | review_src
stringlengths 37
42
| criteria_count
dict | dimension_scores
dict | overall_score
float64 0
6
| thinking_trace
stringclasses 1
value | prompt
stringclasses 1
value | prompt_length
int64 0
0
| conversations
listlengths 2
2
| year
int64 2k
2.03k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 3 Date: 14 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira
Reviewer's report:
The ethics committee text provided for the patients is in Chinese. Unfortunately, I do not speak
or read Chinese, and I am therefore unable to evaluate it. I kindly request that you provide a
translated version in English.
Thank you for your understanding.
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 3 Date: 14 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira
Reviewer's report:
The ethics committee text provided for the patients is in Chinese. Unfortunately, I do not speak
or read Chinese, and I am therefore unable to evaluate it. I kindly request that you provide a
translated version in English.
Thank you for your understanding.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V3_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 3,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 4
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.25,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.75,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.25
}
| 1.25
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 3 Date: 14 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira\nReviewer's report:\nThe ethics committee text provided for the patients is in Chinese. Unfortunately, I do not speak\nor read Chinese, and I am therefore unable to evaluate it. I kindly request that you provide a\ntranslated version in English.\nThank you for your understanding.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Paolo Scanagatta
Reviewer's report:
Manuscript Title: Effects Of Pulmonary Infection On Total Thoracoscopic Surgery In Children
With Congenital Pulmonary Airway Malformation - A Single-center Retrospective Study
General Assessment
The study provides a valuable retrospective analysis of the impact of pulmonary infection on
total thoracoscopic surgery outcomes in children with CPAM. The dataset is well-structured, and
the statistical approach is generally sound. The authors have effectively responded to editorial
requests regarding ethical compliance and informed consent, which now appear adequately
addressed.
However, beyond these ethical aspects, there are still several areas where the manuscript
could benefit from further refinements in terms of methodological clarity, statistical reporting,
language precision, and discussion depth.
Key Areas for Revision
1. Study Design and Methodology
# Clarifications on Infection Categories
The distinction between Non-infection (NI), Hidden infection (HI), and Pulmonary infection
(PI) is critical to the study. While the authors have provided definitions, it would be helpful to
explicitly detail:
Diagnostic criteria used to differentiate HI from PI (e.g., histopathology, inflammatory markers,
imaging findings).
Any potential overlap between categories and how borderline cases were classified.
# Flowchart for Patient Selection
If not already included, adding a flowchart that outlines patient inclusion/exclusion criteria
would improve transparency and help readers understand the cohort formation.
# Surgical Protocol Details
The manuscript would benefit from a clearer description of:
The surgical approach and standard procedure across all cases.
Whether perioperative infection control strategies (e.g., antibiotic prophylaxis) were
standardized across groups.
2. Statistical Analysis and Interpretation
# Analysis of Conversion to Open Thoracotomy
The manuscript reports that conversion rates differed among groups (14.8%, 23.2%, and 29.2%),
but no statistical comparison (p-value) is provided.
If not already included, a statistical test (e.g., chi-square or Fisher’s exact test) should be applied
here.
# Clarification of Non-Significant Trends
Some non-significant findings (e.g., ventilator duration, hospital stay) are discussed in a way
that implies trends.
Ensure that interpretations remain strictly aligned with statistical results and avoid
overinterpretation.
# Effect Size and Confidence Intervals
If feasible, adding effect sizes or confidence intervals for key comparisons (e.g., operative time,
blood loss) would strengthen the robustness of the results.
3. Figures and Tables
# Tables
Tables are well-structured but could benefit from:
- More consistent formatting (ensure uniform decimal places in reported values).
- Footnotes defining all abbreviations and statistical tests used.
# Figures
If not yet included, box plots or bar graphs for operative time, blood loss, and pneumothorax
incidence could enhance data visualization.
4. Language and Clarity
# Grammar and Syntax Improvements
The manuscript contains some awkward phrasing and minor grammatical errors.
A professional language revision is highly recommended for final clarity.
# Refinement of the Title
The title could be slightly revised for conciseness:
"Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with CPAM:
A Retrospective Study"
5. Discussion and Clinical Implications
# Clinical Relevance
The discussion does a good job of contextualizing the findings, but further refinement would
enhance clarity:
More emphasis on the practical implications for surgical decision-making in children with
suspected infection.
Consideration of alternative management strategies (e.g., delaying surgery vs. early
intervention).
# Addressing Study Limitations
The single-center nature of the study and potential selection bias should be acknowledged.
The potential variability in CPAM severity across infection groups should be discussed.
The manuscript is scientifically sound, and the revisions have strengthened the ethical
compliance and methodological transparency. However, further refinements in methodology,
statistical reporting, and language precision will improve clarity and impact.
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Paolo Scanagatta
Reviewer's report:
Manuscript Title: Effects Of Pulmonary Infection On Total Thoracoscopic Surgery In Children
With Congenital Pulmonary Airway Malformation - A Single-center Retrospective Study
General Assessment
The study provides a valuable retrospective analysis of the impact of pulmonary infection on
total thoracoscopic surgery outcomes in children with CPAM. The dataset is well-structured, and
the statistical approach is generally sound. The authors have effectively responded to editorial
requests regarding ethical compliance and informed consent, which now appear adequately
addressed.
However, beyond these ethical aspects, there are still several areas where the manuscript
could benefit from further refinements in terms of methodological clarity, statistical reporting,
language precision, and discussion depth.
Key Areas for Revision
1. Study Design and Methodology
# Clarifications on Infection Categories
The distinction between Non-infection (NI), Hidden infection (HI), and Pulmonary infection
(PI) is critical to the study. While the authors have provided definitions, it would be helpful to
explicitly detail:
Diagnostic criteria used to differentiate HI from PI (e.g., histopathology, inflammatory markers,
imaging findings).
Any potential overlap between categories and how borderline cases were classified.
# Flowchart for Patient Selection
If not already included, adding a flowchart that outlines patient inclusion/exclusion criteria
would improve transparency and help readers understand the cohort formation.
# Surgical Protocol Details
The manuscript would benefit from a clearer description of:
The surgical approach and standard procedure across all cases.
Whether perioperative infection control strategies (e.g., antibiotic prophylaxis) were
standardized across groups.
2. Statistical Analysis and Interpretation
# Analysis of Conversion to Open Thoracotomy
The manuscript reports that conversion rates differed among groups (14.8%, 23.2%, and 29.2%),
but no statistical comparison (p-value) is provided.
If not already included, a statistical test (e.g., chi-square or Fisher’s exact test) should be applied
here.
# Clarification of Non-Significant Trends
Some non-significant findings (e.g., ventilator duration, hospital stay) are discussed in a way
that implies trends.
Ensure that interpretations remain strictly aligned with statistical results and avoid
overinterpretation.
# Effect Size and Confidence Intervals
If feasible, adding effect sizes or confidence intervals for key comparisons (e.g., operative time,
blood loss) would strengthen the robustness of the results.
3. Figures and Tables
# Tables
Tables are well-structured but could benefit from:
- More consistent formatting (ensure uniform decimal places in reported values).
- Footnotes defining all abbreviations and statistical tests used.
# Figures
If not yet included, box plots or bar graphs for operative time, blood loss, and pneumothorax
incidence could enhance data visualization.
4. Language and Clarity
# Grammar and Syntax Improvements
The manuscript contains some awkward phrasing and minor grammatical errors.
A professional language revision is highly recommended for final clarity.
# Refinement of the Title
The title could be slightly revised for conciseness:
"Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with CPAM:
A Retrospective Study"
5. Discussion and Clinical Implications
# Clinical Relevance
The discussion does a good job of contextualizing the findings, but further refinement would
enhance clarity:
More emphasis on the practical implications for surgical decision-making in children with
suspected infection.
Consideration of alternative management strategies (e.g., delaying surgery vs. early
intervention).
# Addressing Study Limitations
The single-center nature of the study and potential selection bias should be acknowledged.
The potential variability in CPAM severity across infection groups should be discussed.
The manuscript is scientifically sound, and the revisions have strengthened the ethical
compliance and methodological transparency. However, further refinements in methodology,
statistical reporting, and language precision will improve clarity and impact.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V3_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 3,
"materials_and_methods": 17,
"praise": 7,
"presentation_and_reporting": 13,
"results_and_discussion": 7,
"suggestion_and_solution": 17,
"total": 31
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.06451612903225806,
"example": 0.03225806451612903,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.0967741935483871,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5483870967741935,
"praise": 0.22580645161290322,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.41935483870967744,
"results_and_discussion": 0.22580645161290322,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.5483870967741935
}
| 2.16129
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Paolo Scanagatta\nReviewer's report:\nManuscript Title: Effects Of Pulmonary Infection On Total Thoracoscopic Surgery In Children\nWith Congenital Pulmonary Airway Malformation - A Single-center Retrospective Study\nGeneral Assessment\nThe study provides a valuable retrospective analysis of the impact of pulmonary infection on\ntotal thoracoscopic surgery outcomes in children with CPAM. The dataset is well-structured, and\nthe statistical approach is generally sound. The authors have effectively responded to editorial\nrequests regarding ethical compliance and informed consent, which now appear adequately\naddressed.\nHowever, beyond these ethical aspects, there are still several areas where the manuscript\ncould benefit from further refinements in terms of methodological clarity, statistical reporting,\nlanguage precision, and discussion depth.\nKey Areas for Revision\n1. Study Design and Methodology\n# Clarifications on Infection Categories\nThe distinction between Non-infection (NI), Hidden infection (HI), and Pulmonary infection\n(PI) is critical to the study. While the authors have provided definitions, it would be helpful to\nexplicitly detail:\nDiagnostic criteria used to differentiate HI from PI (e.g., histopathology, inflammatory markers,\nimaging findings).\nAny potential overlap between categories and how borderline cases were classified.\n# Flowchart for Patient Selection\nIf not already included, adding a flowchart that outlines patient inclusion/exclusion criteria\nwould improve transparency and help readers understand the cohort formation.\n# Surgical Protocol Details\nThe manuscript would benefit from a clearer description of:\nThe surgical approach and standard procedure across all cases.\nWhether perioperative infection control strategies (e.g., antibiotic prophylaxis) were\nstandardized across groups.\n2. Statistical Analysis and Interpretation\n# Analysis of Conversion to Open Thoracotomy\nThe manuscript reports that conversion rates differed among groups (14.8%, 23.2%, and 29.2%),\nbut no statistical comparison (p-value) is provided.\nIf not already included, a statistical test (e.g., chi-square or Fisher’s exact test) should be applied\nhere.\n# Clarification of Non-Significant Trends\nSome non-significant findings (e.g., ventilator duration, hospital stay) are discussed in a way\nthat implies trends.\nEnsure that interpretations remain strictly aligned with statistical results and avoid\noverinterpretation.\n# Effect Size and Confidence Intervals\nIf feasible, adding effect sizes or confidence intervals for key comparisons (e.g., operative time,\nblood loss) would strengthen the robustness of the results.\n3. Figures and Tables\n# Tables\nTables are well-structured but could benefit from:\n- More consistent formatting (ensure uniform decimal places in reported values).\n- Footnotes defining all abbreviations and statistical tests used.\n# Figures\nIf not yet included, box plots or bar graphs for operative time, blood loss, and pneumothorax\nincidence could enhance data visualization.\n4. Language and Clarity\n# Grammar and Syntax Improvements\nThe manuscript contains some awkward phrasing and minor grammatical errors.\nA professional language revision is highly recommended for final clarity.\n# Refinement of the Title\nThe title could be slightly revised for conciseness:\n\"Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with CPAM:\nA Retrospective Study\"\n5. Discussion and Clinical Implications\n# Clinical Relevance\nThe discussion does a good job of contextualizing the findings, but further refinement would\nenhance clarity:\nMore emphasis on the practical implications for surgical decision-making in children with\nsuspected infection.\nConsideration of alternative management strategies (e.g., delaying surgery vs. early\nintervention).\n# Addressing Study Limitations\nThe single-center nature of the study and potential selection bias should be acknowledged.\nThe potential variability in CPAM severity across infection groups should be discussed.\nThe manuscript is scientifically sound, and the revisions have strengthened the ethical\ncompliance and methodological transparency. However, further refinements in methodology,\nstatistical reporting, and language precision will improve clarity and impact.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Fazl# Yanik
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for the revised article.
The revised article can be accepted now.
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Fazl# Yanik
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for the revised article.
The revised article can be accepted now.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V4_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 0.5,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.5
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Fazl# Yanik\nReviewer's report:\nDear authors,\nThank you for the revised article.\nThe revised article can be accepted now.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Paolo Scanagatta
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your detailed revisions and for addressing the reviewers' comments
comprehensively. Your updates have significantly improved the clarity and robustness of the
manuscript.
The methodology is now well-defined, with clearer explanations regarding the classification of
patients into NI, HI, and PI groups.
The additional statistical details strengthen the reliability of the findings.
Ethical considerations are now fully addressed, ensuring compliance with international research
standards.
The language has been improved, making the text more readable and precise.
I appreciate your efforts in refining the manuscript, and I have no further concerns.
Best regards
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Paolo Scanagatta
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your detailed revisions and for addressing the reviewers' comments
comprehensively. Your updates have significantly improved the clarity and robustness of the
manuscript.
The methodology is now well-defined, with clearer explanations regarding the classification of
patients into NI, HI, and PI groups.
The additional statistical details strengthen the reliability of the findings.
Ethical considerations are now fully addressed, ensuring compliance with international research
standards.
The language has been improved, making the text more readable and precise.
I appreciate your efforts in refining the manuscript, and I have no further concerns.
Best regards
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V4_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 5,
"presentation_and_reporting": 1,
"results_and_discussion": 1,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 8
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.125,
"praise": 0.625,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.125,
"results_and_discussion": 0.125,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.125
}
| 1.125
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 4 Date: 17 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Paolo Scanagatta\nReviewer's report:\nDear Authors,\nThank you for your detailed revisions and for addressing the reviewers' comments\ncomprehensively. Your updates have significantly improved the clarity and robustness of the\nmanuscript.\nThe methodology is now well-defined, with clearer explanations regarding the classification of\npatients into NI, HI, and PI groups.\nThe additional statistical details strengthen the reliability of the findings.\nEthical considerations are now fully addressed, ensuring compliance with international research\nstandards.\nThe language has been improved, making the text more readable and precise.\nI appreciate your efforts in refining the manuscript, and I have no further concerns.\nBest regards",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
The authors are thanked to have submitted their interesting work to the journal. The strength of
the article consists in the correct methodology and the wide series, considering the rarity of the
presented condition. Results are promising and tables are attractive. Some few comments below.
1. Results are promising but the Authors do not state definitive conclusions at the end, so the
real indication and the primary aim of the study is difficult to understand and a brief discussion/
comment on that should be added, to improve the current literature on the topic.
2. Considering the Results, what are the final indication of the Authors for the clinical practice
management of these subcategories of patients?
3. Some figures (CT scan, pathology) should be added to make the work more attractive.
4. Literature could be improved with recent works discussing on the topic (Marinucci, B.T.;
Menna, C.; Scanagatta, P.; Fiorelli, S.; Tiracorrendo, M.; Naldi, G.; Inserra, A.; Macchini,
F.; Rendina, E.A.; Ibrahim, M. Do More with Less? Lobectomy vs. Segmentectomy for
Patients with Congenital Pulmonary Malformations. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 5237. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ jcm12165237).
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
The authors are thanked to have submitted their interesting work to the journal. The strength of
the article consists in the correct methodology and the wide series, considering the rarity of the
presented condition. Results are promising and tables are attractive. Some few comments below.
1. Results are promising but the Authors do not state definitive conclusions at the end, so the
real indication and the primary aim of the study is difficult to understand and a brief discussion/
comment on that should be added, to improve the current literature on the topic.
2. Considering the Results, what are the final indication of the Authors for the clinical practice
management of these subcategories of patients?
3. Some figures (CT scan, pathology) should be added to make the work more attractive.
4. Literature could be improved with recent works discussing on the topic (Marinucci, B.T.;
Menna, C.; Scanagatta, P.; Fiorelli, S.; Tiracorrendo, M.; Naldi, G.; Inserra, A.; Macchini,
F.; Rendina, E.A.; Ibrahim, M. Do More with Less? Lobectomy vs. Segmentectomy for
Patients with Congenital Pulmonary Malformations. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 5237. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ jcm12165237).
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V4_R3.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 2,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 4,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 3,
"suggestion_and_solution": 3,
"total": 18
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.05555555555555555,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.1111111111111111,
"materials_and_methods": 0.05555555555555555,
"praise": 0.2222222222222222,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.1111111111111111,
"results_and_discussion": 0.16666666666666666,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.16666666666666666
}
| 0.888889
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nThe authors are thanked to have submitted their interesting work to the journal. The strength of\nthe article consists in the correct methodology and the wide series, considering the rarity of the\npresented condition. Results are promising and tables are attractive. Some few comments below.\n1. Results are promising but the Authors do not state definitive conclusions at the end, so the\nreal indication and the primary aim of the study is difficult to understand and a brief discussion/\ncomment on that should be added, to improve the current literature on the topic.\n2. Considering the Results, what are the final indication of the Authors for the clinical practice\nmanagement of these subcategories of patients?\n3. Some figures (CT scan, pathology) should be added to make the work more attractive.\n4. Literature could be improved with recent works discussing on the topic (Marinucci, B.T.;\nMenna, C.; Scanagatta, P.; Fiorelli, S.; Tiracorrendo, M.; Naldi, G.; Inserra, A.; Macchini,\nF.; Rendina, E.A.; Ibrahim, M. Do More with Less? Lobectomy vs. Segmentectomy for\nPatients with Congenital Pulmonary Malformations. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 5237. https://\ndoi.org/10.3390/ jcm12165237).",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02827-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira
Reviewer's report:
The authors have reviewed the requested corrections, and the article is now ready for acceptance.
|
Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with
CPAM: A Retrospective Study
Version: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira
Reviewer's report:
The authors have reviewed the requested corrections, and the article is now ready for acceptance.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2827_ReviewerReport_V4_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Impact of Pulmonary Infection on Thoracoscopic Surgery Outcomes in Children with\nCPAM: A Retrospective Study\nVersion: 4 Date: 19 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Rachid Eduardo Noleto da Nobrega Oliveira\nReviewer's report:\nThe authors have reviewed the requested corrections, and the article is now ready for acceptance.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 27 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your valuable article, and it is my pleasure to review the manuscript entitled
“Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery
to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis”. The authors stated,
in this retrospective study, that Increasing the blood pressure before the end of gastrectomy
can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage. I totally agree with
this issue. This paper gives us the important information, however it has also a number of
weaknesses. Thus, I would provide the following comments and queries.
Major comment #1) The authors stated that “Increasing the blood pressure before the end of
gastrectomy can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage”. I totally
agree with this conclusion. However, what can directly reduce postoperative bleeding is, above
all, preventing intraoperative bleeding events. The authors overlooked these issues and should
add these issues to the discussion. For example, near-infrared (NIR) light has longer wavelengths
and allows greater penetration into tissues. ICG-guided NIR imaging navigational surgery can
provide better visualization of lymph nodes and lymphatic channels than other dying materials
under visible light. Fluorescent image-guided surgery can help surgeons obtain additional
anatomical information, such as identifying lymph nodes in thick fatty tissues, discerning
lymphatic channels from vasculatures, identifying the origin and shape of a vessel (Reference
#1). These actually made less bleeding events during infra-pyloric lymphatic dissection during
gastrectomy. In addition, deep neuromuscular block (method of anesthesia) prevented bleeding
events than moderate neuromuscular block during gastric cancer surgery (Reference #2).
Therefore, I hope the authors should add the issues and cite the references as follows
in discussion part, that "To reduce postoperative bleeding, it is also important to reduce
intraoperative bleeding. Deep neuromuscular block and NIR-guided surgery are also considered
necessary in efforts to reduce intraoperative bleeding, ultimately reducing postoperative
bleeding."
Reference #1) Park SH, Berlth F, Choi JH, Park JH, Suh YS, Kong SH, Park DJ, Lee HJ,
Yang HK. Near-infrared fluorescence-guided surgery using indocyanine green facilitates secure
infrapyloric lymph node dissection during laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Surg Today. 2020
Oct;50(10):1187-1196.
Reference #2) Park SH, Huh H, Choi SI, Kim JH, Jang YJ, Park JM, Kwon OK, Jung MR, Jeong
O, Lee CM, Min JS, Kim JJ, An L, Yang KS, Park S, Lee IO; Deep Neuromuscular Block on
Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients (DEBLOQS_GC)
Study Group. Impact of the Deep Neuromuscular Block on Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic
Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2022
Mar 1;234(3):326-339. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000061.
Minor comment #1) Check whether the p-value of 0.045 (type of gastrectomy) in table 2 is
correct. The rate of type of gastrectomy (Disal / Total / Proximal) seems similar between two
groups.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 27 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your valuable article, and it is my pleasure to review the manuscript entitled
“Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery
to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis”. The authors stated,
in this retrospective study, that Increasing the blood pressure before the end of gastrectomy
can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage. I totally agree with
this issue. This paper gives us the important information, however it has also a number of
weaknesses. Thus, I would provide the following comments and queries.
Major comment #1) The authors stated that “Increasing the blood pressure before the end of
gastrectomy can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage”. I totally
agree with this conclusion. However, what can directly reduce postoperative bleeding is, above
all, preventing intraoperative bleeding events. The authors overlooked these issues and should
add these issues to the discussion. For example, near-infrared (NIR) light has longer wavelengths
and allows greater penetration into tissues. ICG-guided NIR imaging navigational surgery can
provide better visualization of lymph nodes and lymphatic channels than other dying materials
under visible light. Fluorescent image-guided surgery can help surgeons obtain additional
anatomical information, such as identifying lymph nodes in thick fatty tissues, discerning
lymphatic channels from vasculatures, identifying the origin and shape of a vessel (Reference
#1). These actually made less bleeding events during infra-pyloric lymphatic dissection during
gastrectomy. In addition, deep neuromuscular block (method of anesthesia) prevented bleeding
events than moderate neuromuscular block during gastric cancer surgery (Reference #2).
Therefore, I hope the authors should add the issues and cite the references as follows
in discussion part, that "To reduce postoperative bleeding, it is also important to reduce
intraoperative bleeding. Deep neuromuscular block and NIR-guided surgery are also considered
necessary in efforts to reduce intraoperative bleeding, ultimately reducing postoperative
bleeding."
Reference #1) Park SH, Berlth F, Choi JH, Park JH, Suh YS, Kong SH, Park DJ, Lee HJ,
Yang HK. Near-infrared fluorescence-guided surgery using indocyanine green facilitates secure
infrapyloric lymph node dissection during laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Surg Today. 2020
Oct;50(10):1187-1196.
Reference #2) Park SH, Huh H, Choi SI, Kim JH, Jang YJ, Park JM, Kwon OK, Jung MR, Jeong
O, Lee CM, Min JS, Kim JJ, An L, Yang KS, Park S, Lee IO; Deep Neuromuscular Block on
Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients (DEBLOQS_GC)
Study Group. Impact of the Deep Neuromuscular Block on Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic
Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2022
Mar 1;234(3):326-339. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000061.
Minor comment #1) Check whether the p-value of 0.045 (type of gastrectomy) in table 2 is
correct. The rate of type of gastrectomy (Disal / Total / Proximal) seems similar between two
groups.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V1_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 8,
"praise": 2,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 4,
"suggestion_and_solution": 5,
"total": 26
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.038461538461538464,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.3076923076923077,
"praise": 0.07692307692307693,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.07692307692307693,
"results_and_discussion": 0.15384615384615385,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.19230769230769232
}
| 0.846154
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 1 Date: 27 Jan 2025\nReviewer's report:\nThank you for your valuable article, and it is my pleasure to review the manuscript entitled\n“Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery\nto reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis”. The authors stated,\nin this retrospective study, that Increasing the blood pressure before the end of gastrectomy\ncan effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage. I totally agree with\nthis issue. This paper gives us the important information, however it has also a number of\nweaknesses. Thus, I would provide the following comments and queries.\nMajor comment #1) The authors stated that “Increasing the blood pressure before the end of\ngastrectomy can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative primary hemorrhage”. I totally\nagree with this conclusion. However, what can directly reduce postoperative bleeding is, above\nall, preventing intraoperative bleeding events. The authors overlooked these issues and should\nadd these issues to the discussion. For example, near-infrared (NIR) light has longer wavelengths\nand allows greater penetration into tissues. ICG-guided NIR imaging navigational surgery can\nprovide better visualization of lymph nodes and lymphatic channels than other dying materials\nunder visible light. Fluorescent image-guided surgery can help surgeons obtain additional\nanatomical information, such as identifying lymph nodes in thick fatty tissues, discerning\nlymphatic channels from vasculatures, identifying the origin and shape of a vessel (Reference\n#1). These actually made less bleeding events during infra-pyloric lymphatic dissection during\ngastrectomy. In addition, deep neuromuscular block (method of anesthesia) prevented bleeding\nevents than moderate neuromuscular block during gastric cancer surgery (Reference #2).\nTherefore, I hope the authors should add the issues and cite the references as follows\nin discussion part, that \"To reduce postoperative bleeding, it is also important to reduce\nintraoperative bleeding. Deep neuromuscular block and NIR-guided surgery are also considered\nnecessary in efforts to reduce intraoperative bleeding, ultimately reducing postoperative\nbleeding.\"\nReference #1) Park SH, Berlth F, Choi JH, Park JH, Suh YS, Kong SH, Park DJ, Lee HJ,\nYang HK. Near-infrared fluorescence-guided surgery using indocyanine green facilitates secure\ninfrapyloric lymph node dissection during laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Surg Today. 2020\nOct;50(10):1187-1196.\nReference #2) Park SH, Huh H, Choi SI, Kim JH, Jang YJ, Park JM, Kwon OK, Jung MR, Jeong\nO, Lee CM, Min JS, Kim JJ, An L, Yang KS, Park S, Lee IO; Deep Neuromuscular Block on\nOncologic Quality of Laparoscopic Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients (DEBLOQS_GC)\nStudy Group. Impact of the Deep Neuromuscular Block on Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic\nSurgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2022\nMar 1;234(3):326-339. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000061.\nMinor comment #1) Check whether the p-value of 0.045 (type of gastrectomy) in table 2 is\ncorrect. The rate of type of gastrectomy (Disal / Total / Proximal) seems similar between two\ngroups.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Tutkun Talih
Reviewer's report:
The study is well designed and carefully written.
The images are appropriate and well chosen.
But I don't think it contributes to the literature.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Tutkun Talih
Reviewer's report:
The study is well designed and carefully written.
The images are appropriate and well chosen.
But I don't think it contributes to the literature.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V1_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 1,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 2,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 3
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.3333333333333333,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.3333333333333333,
"materials_and_methods": 0.3333333333333333,
"praise": 0.6666666666666666,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.6666666666666666,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 2.333333
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Tutkun Talih\nReviewer's report:\nThe study is well designed and carefully written.\nThe images are appropriate and well chosen.\nBut I don't think it contributes to the literature.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Congratulations on your effort in this research. The topic is interesting, and increasing blood
pressure has been used in some fields of surgery. However, there are some issues that need to
be acknowledged.
1- In my opinion, the abstract is quite long. Consider to shorten it. Especially, the specific
technique is unnecessarily long in the methods section.
2- Backgrounds in the introduction section are insufficient. It should mention how the bleedings
mostly occur, how it can be managed, and what are the consuquences?
3- The authors need to fully redesign the methods section. The subheadings are wrong, and
mixed. 'Methods and group ' unnecessary. Why is there a dot at the and?
4- In the specific surgical methods part, the authors declared hemostasis was stopped. Do you
mean hemostasis was achieved or was bleeding stopped?
5- In the statistical analysis section, please clarify how you perform propensity score matching
in detail.
6- Please clarify why you performed this blood pressure method on this 157 patient. What are
the selection criteria? Please clarify to avoid selection biases.
7- Why did you not include the type of gastrectomy in the PSM analysis? The purpose of PSM
was to homogenize the groups; however, the type of surgery differed significantly after PSM.
Please clarify.
8- Please also give the results of Table 2 before PSM.
9- In Table 4, the number of cases was given as 175. Is it correct? Please clarify.
10- In 157 patients of the experimental group, how many cases did you need extra hemostasis
during the surgery? How you explain this difference between the groups?
11- The discussion section is very superficial. It mostly not discussed, but explain how bleeding
occurs. A deeper evaluation with existing studies is needed in discussion section.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Congratulations on your effort in this research. The topic is interesting, and increasing blood
pressure has been used in some fields of surgery. However, there are some issues that need to
be acknowledged.
1- In my opinion, the abstract is quite long. Consider to shorten it. Especially, the specific
technique is unnecessarily long in the methods section.
2- Backgrounds in the introduction section are insufficient. It should mention how the bleedings
mostly occur, how it can be managed, and what are the consuquences?
3- The authors need to fully redesign the methods section. The subheadings are wrong, and
mixed. 'Methods and group ' unnecessary. Why is there a dot at the and?
4- In the specific surgical methods part, the authors declared hemostasis was stopped. Do you
mean hemostasis was achieved or was bleeding stopped?
5- In the statistical analysis section, please clarify how you perform propensity score matching
in detail.
6- Please clarify why you performed this blood pressure method on this 157 patient. What are
the selection criteria? Please clarify to avoid selection biases.
7- Why did you not include the type of gastrectomy in the PSM analysis? The purpose of PSM
was to homogenize the groups; however, the type of surgery differed significantly after PSM.
Please clarify.
8- Please also give the results of Table 2 before PSM.
9- In Table 4, the number of cases was given as 175. Is it correct? Please clarify.
10- In 157 patients of the experimental group, how many cases did you need extra hemostasis
during the surgery? How you explain this difference between the groups?
11- The discussion section is very superficial. It mostly not discussed, but explain how bleeding
occurs. A deeper evaluation with existing studies is needed in discussion section.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V1_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 5,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 1,
"materials_and_methods": 15,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 14,
"results_and_discussion": 4,
"suggestion_and_solution": 11,
"total": 30
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.16666666666666666,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.03333333333333333,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 0.03333333333333333,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.4666666666666667,
"results_and_discussion": 0.13333333333333333,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.36666666666666664
}
| 1.7
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Hilmi Yazici\nReviewer's report:\nDear Authors,\nCongratulations on your effort in this research. The topic is interesting, and increasing blood\npressure has been used in some fields of surgery. However, there are some issues that need to\nbe acknowledged.\n1- In my opinion, the abstract is quite long. Consider to shorten it. Especially, the specific\ntechnique is unnecessarily long in the methods section.\n2- Backgrounds in the introduction section are insufficient. It should mention how the bleedings\nmostly occur, how it can be managed, and what are the consuquences?\n3- The authors need to fully redesign the methods section. The subheadings are wrong, and\nmixed. 'Methods and group ' unnecessary. Why is there a dot at the and?\n4- In the specific surgical methods part, the authors declared hemostasis was stopped. Do you\nmean hemostasis was achieved or was bleeding stopped?\n5- In the statistical analysis section, please clarify how you perform propensity score matching\nin detail.\n6- Please clarify why you performed this blood pressure method on this 157 patient. What are\nthe selection criteria? Please clarify to avoid selection biases.\n7- Why did you not include the type of gastrectomy in the PSM analysis? The purpose of PSM\nwas to homogenize the groups; however, the type of surgery differed significantly after PSM.\nPlease clarify.\n8- Please also give the results of Table 2 before PSM.\n9- In Table 4, the number of cases was given as 175. Is it correct? Please clarify.\n10- In 157 patients of the experimental group, how many cases did you need extra hemostasis\nduring the surgery? How you explain this difference between the groups?\n11- The discussion section is very superficial. It mostly not discussed, but explain how bleeding\noccurs. A deeper evaluation with existing studies is needed in discussion section.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, please address the following points below
-While the study uses propensity score matching to reduce confounding, the lack of
randomization limits the ability to draw definitive causal conclusions. Randomized controlled
trials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold standard for testing interventions like this.
Propensity score matching, while useful in observational studies, cannot fully eliminate selection
bias.
-The study distinguishes between early and delayed bleeding, but the exact mechanisms or
clinical factors contributing to these types of bleeding are not fully explored. A deeper dive into
what differentiates these two categories, especially in terms of risk factors, could provide more
context for why the intervention worked (or didn’t work) in specific cases. For example, how
does the timing of bleeding correlate with different surgical or patient characteristics?
-The norepinephrine dosing (2–10 µg/kg·min) is mentioned, but further details on how the dose
was adjusted intraoperatively based on patient-specific parameters (e.g., weight, baseline BP,
or response to norepinephrine) would provide a clearer understanding of the intervention’s
implementation. Was there a specific goal for BP increase beyond just raising it by 20%?
Understanding this would be useful for clinical application and replication in future studies.
-While postoperative bleeding within the first 48 hours is critical to address, the lack of long-
term follow-up (beyond 48 hours) is a limitation. Delayed bleeding, especially at the 1-week
mark, may be an important outcome to investigate more thoroughly. Longer follow-up would
help assess whether early bleeding reduction translates into better long-term outcomes or if the
initial BP increase might have secondary effects that manifest later.
-While the authors appropriately acknowledge that prophylactic blood pressure increase did not
significantly affect delayed bleeding (P = 0.156), there could be more discussion on why this
intervention does not impact delayed bleeding. Delayed bleeding often involves more complex
issues such as ruptured large blood vessels, anastomotic ulceration, or infections—issues that
would not necessarily be addressed by increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery. A
more in-depth exploration of the mechanisms behind delayed bleeding and why this intervention
is not effective for it would be valuable for the reader’s understanding.
-The discussion provides a general explanation of potential bleeding mechanisms, especially for
early bleeding. However, it would be beneficial to discuss the underlying mechanisms of delayed
bleeding in more detail. For example, the authors mention the rupture of a pseudoaneurysm near
the gastroduodenal artery and how infection contributed to delayed bleeding, but there could
be a deeper dive into how these complications develop. This could help the reader understand
that the prophylactic increase in blood pressure is unlikely to affect these more complex and
delayed issues.
-The discussion mentions the use of ultrasonic knives for hemostasis and how they can lead to an
unstable protein pseudomembrane that might detach postoperatively, causing bleeding. While
this is an important point, the connection between this phenomenon and the study’s intervention
could be made more explicit. How exactly does the blood pressure increase help detect this
unstable pseudomembrane? A more detailed explanation of this mechanism—how BP increase
could identify vulnerable areas formed by the ultrasonic knife—would help the reader fully
appreciate the proposed intervention’s utility.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, please address the following points below
-While the study uses propensity score matching to reduce confounding, the lack of
randomization limits the ability to draw definitive causal conclusions. Randomized controlled
trials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold standard for testing interventions like this.
Propensity score matching, while useful in observational studies, cannot fully eliminate selection
bias.
-The study distinguishes between early and delayed bleeding, but the exact mechanisms or
clinical factors contributing to these types of bleeding are not fully explored. A deeper dive into
what differentiates these two categories, especially in terms of risk factors, could provide more
context for why the intervention worked (or didn’t work) in specific cases. For example, how
does the timing of bleeding correlate with different surgical or patient characteristics?
-The norepinephrine dosing (2–10 µg/kg·min) is mentioned, but further details on how the dose
was adjusted intraoperatively based on patient-specific parameters (e.g., weight, baseline BP,
or response to norepinephrine) would provide a clearer understanding of the intervention’s
implementation. Was there a specific goal for BP increase beyond just raising it by 20%?
Understanding this would be useful for clinical application and replication in future studies.
-While postoperative bleeding within the first 48 hours is critical to address, the lack of long-
term follow-up (beyond 48 hours) is a limitation. Delayed bleeding, especially at the 1-week
mark, may be an important outcome to investigate more thoroughly. Longer follow-up would
help assess whether early bleeding reduction translates into better long-term outcomes or if the
initial BP increase might have secondary effects that manifest later.
-While the authors appropriately acknowledge that prophylactic blood pressure increase did not
significantly affect delayed bleeding (P = 0.156), there could be more discussion on why this
intervention does not impact delayed bleeding. Delayed bleeding often involves more complex
issues such as ruptured large blood vessels, anastomotic ulceration, or infections—issues that
would not necessarily be addressed by increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery. A
more in-depth exploration of the mechanisms behind delayed bleeding and why this intervention
is not effective for it would be valuable for the reader’s understanding.
-The discussion provides a general explanation of potential bleeding mechanisms, especially for
early bleeding. However, it would be beneficial to discuss the underlying mechanisms of delayed
bleeding in more detail. For example, the authors mention the rupture of a pseudoaneurysm near
the gastroduodenal artery and how infection contributed to delayed bleeding, but there could
be a deeper dive into how these complications develop. This could help the reader understand
that the prophylactic increase in blood pressure is unlikely to affect these more complex and
delayed issues.
-The discussion mentions the use of ultrasonic knives for hemostasis and how they can lead to an
unstable protein pseudomembrane that might detach postoperatively, causing bleeding. While
this is an important point, the connection between this phenomenon and the study’s intervention
could be made more explicit. How exactly does the blood pressure increase help detect this
unstable pseudomembrane? A more detailed explanation of this mechanism—how BP increase
could identify vulnerable areas formed by the ultrasonic knife—would help the reader fully
appreciate the proposed intervention’s utility.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V1_R5.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 3,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 4,
"materials_and_methods": 12,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 4,
"results_and_discussion": 6,
"suggestion_and_solution": 10,
"total": 23
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.13043478260869565,
"example": 0.043478260869565216,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.17391304347826086,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5217391304347826,
"praise": 0.043478260869565216,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.17391304347826086,
"results_and_discussion": 0.2608695652173913,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.43478260869565216
}
| 1.782609
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr\nReviewer's report:\nDear Authors, please address the following points below\n-While the study uses propensity score matching to reduce confounding, the lack of\nrandomization limits the ability to draw definitive causal conclusions. Randomized controlled\ntrials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold standard for testing interventions like this.\nPropensity score matching, while useful in observational studies, cannot fully eliminate selection\nbias.\n-The study distinguishes between early and delayed bleeding, but the exact mechanisms or\nclinical factors contributing to these types of bleeding are not fully explored. A deeper dive into\nwhat differentiates these two categories, especially in terms of risk factors, could provide more\ncontext for why the intervention worked (or didn’t work) in specific cases. For example, how\ndoes the timing of bleeding correlate with different surgical or patient characteristics?\n-The norepinephrine dosing (2–10 µg/kg·min) is mentioned, but further details on how the dose\nwas adjusted intraoperatively based on patient-specific parameters (e.g., weight, baseline BP,\nor response to norepinephrine) would provide a clearer understanding of the intervention’s\nimplementation. Was there a specific goal for BP increase beyond just raising it by 20%?\nUnderstanding this would be useful for clinical application and replication in future studies.\n-While postoperative bleeding within the first 48 hours is critical to address, the lack of long-\nterm follow-up (beyond 48 hours) is a limitation. Delayed bleeding, especially at the 1-week\nmark, may be an important outcome to investigate more thoroughly. Longer follow-up would\nhelp assess whether early bleeding reduction translates into better long-term outcomes or if the\ninitial BP increase might have secondary effects that manifest later.\n-While the authors appropriately acknowledge that prophylactic blood pressure increase did not\nsignificantly affect delayed bleeding (P = 0.156), there could be more discussion on why this\nintervention does not impact delayed bleeding. Delayed bleeding often involves more complex\nissues such as ruptured large blood vessels, anastomotic ulceration, or infections—issues that\nwould not necessarily be addressed by increasing blood pressure before the end of surgery. A\nmore in-depth exploration of the mechanisms behind delayed bleeding and why this intervention\nis not effective for it would be valuable for the reader’s understanding.\n-The discussion provides a general explanation of potential bleeding mechanisms, especially for\nearly bleeding. However, it would be beneficial to discuss the underlying mechanisms of delayed\nbleeding in more detail. For example, the authors mention the rupture of a pseudoaneurysm near\nthe gastroduodenal artery and how infection contributed to delayed bleeding, but there could\nbe a deeper dive into how these complications develop. This could help the reader understand\nthat the prophylactic increase in blood pressure is unlikely to affect these more complex and\ndelayed issues.\n-The discussion mentions the use of ultrasonic knives for hemostasis and how they can lead to an\nunstable protein pseudomembrane that might detach postoperatively, causing bleeding. While\nthis is an important point, the connection between this phenomenon and the study’s intervention\ncould be made more explicit. How exactly does the blood pressure increase help detect this\nunstable pseudomembrane? A more detailed explanation of this mechanism—how BP increase\ncould identify vulnerable areas formed by the ultrasonic knife—would help the reader fully\nappreciate the proposed intervention’s utility.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 01 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 1 Date: 01 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V1_R3.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 1 Date: 01 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 11 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your revisions. There are still some issues that need to be acknowledged.
Please give your responses in a point-by-point manner. A total answer is making them hard to
understand.
1- The abstract is still too long. 447 words are too much for an abstract. Please shorten the
methods section especially.
2- Methods section, The exclusion criteri:Contraindications , please correct this sentence.
3- There are numerous typo errors throughout the manuscript. Please revise them.
4- in your responses paper, you declared that intraoperative hemostasis in the experimental group
is not the main focus of the study. If increasing blood pressure shows you the potential bleeding
in the operating room, I think that should be the mechanism; then, it must be further analyzed.
If you say no, this is not the main focus of this study, then please explain the mechanism of
preventing bleeding in the experimental group.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 11 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your revisions. There are still some issues that need to be acknowledged.
Please give your responses in a point-by-point manner. A total answer is making them hard to
understand.
1- The abstract is still too long. 447 words are too much for an abstract. Please shorten the
methods section especially.
2- Methods section, The exclusion criteri:Contraindications , please correct this sentence.
3- There are numerous typo errors throughout the manuscript. Please revise them.
4- in your responses paper, you declared that intraoperative hemostasis in the experimental group
is not the main focus of the study. If increasing blood pressure shows you the potential bleeding
in the operating room, I think that should be the mechanism; then, it must be further analyzed.
If you say no, this is not the main focus of this study, then please explain the mechanism of
preventing bleeding in the experimental group.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V2_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 4,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 2,
"materials_and_methods": 6,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 9,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 7,
"total": 13
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.3076923076923077,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.15384615384615385,
"materials_and_methods": 0.46153846153846156,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.6923076923076923,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.5384615384615384
}
| 2.153846
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 2 Date: 11 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Hilmi Yazici\nReviewer's report:\nDear Authors,\nThank you for your revisions. There are still some issues that need to be acknowledged.\nPlease give your responses in a point-by-point manner. A total answer is making them hard to\nunderstand.\n1- The abstract is still too long. 447 words are too much for an abstract. Please shorten the\nmethods section especially.\n2- Methods section, The exclusion criteri:Contraindications , please correct this sentence.\n3- There are numerous typo errors throughout the manuscript. Please revise them.\n4- in your responses paper, you declared that intraoperative hemostasis in the experimental group\nis not the main focus of the study. If increasing blood pressure shows you the potential bleeding\nin the operating room, I think that should be the mechanism; then, it must be further analyzed.\nIf you say no, this is not the main focus of this study, then please explain the mechanism of\npreventing bleeding in the experimental group.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
The responses are satisfactory.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
The responses are satisfactory.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V2_R5.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 2
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr\nReviewer's report:\nThe responses are satisfactory.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I decided acceptance, because the manuscript was well revised.
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I decided acceptance, because the manuscript was well revised.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V2_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 2
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 2 Date: 12 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nI decided acceptance, because the manuscript was well revised.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02826-8
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 3 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Well done. No more comments
|
Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of
surgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis
Version: 3 Date: 19 Feb 2025
Reviewer: Hilmi Yazici
Reviewer's report:
Well done. No more comments
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2826_ReviewerReport_V3_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 0.5,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Analysis of the efficiency of a prophylactic increasing blood pressure before the end of\nsurgery to reduce bleeding after gastrectomy: a propensity score–matched analysis\nVersion: 3 Date: 19 Feb 2025\nReviewer: Hilmi Yazici\nReviewer's report:\nWell done. No more comments",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02819-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 14 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
see the uploaded file
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 14 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
see the uploaded file
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2819_ReviewerReport_V0_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis\nof Randomized Controlled Trials\nVersion: 0 Date: 14 Dec 2024\nReviewer's report:\nsee the uploaded file",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02819-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 16 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer comments to authors
Overall, this is a clear and well-written manuscript. The authors make a systematic contribution
to the research literature in this area of investigation. I have some concerns and suggestions
for each aspect of the manuscript. I also recommend that the authors to get an English editing
service.
Abstracts
Overall, the abstracts is clear, concise, and well-written.
Introduction
The introduction is relevant and theory based. Sufficient information about the previous study
findings is presented for readers to follow the present study rationale. However, it is redundant
and I recommend that you revise it to be shorter and more concise.
Material and methods
Overall, this is well-written and I have no suggestions.
Results
In general, the results are reasonable and logically consistent. Although the sample size is small,
the statistical results are expected to be somewhat reliable because the authors included only
randomized controlled trials that included placebo group in their statistical analysis. In ‘3.3.6
the Overall incidence of complications’ section, it would be good to briefly mention the types of
complications. Although the classification of complications varies by study, but it is necessary
to briefly mention them. No additional statistical analysis is required for this.
Discussion
The discussion section provides a relatively well-described scientific background supporting the
efficacy of metronidazole in reducing pain after hemorrhoid surgery. As the authors pointed
out, we cannot overlook the concerns about complications and the occurrence of resistant
strains after metronidazole administration. However, the authors' research results do not include
information about resistant strains after metronidazole administration, I recommend removing
the risk of ‘potential metronidazole resistance’ from the conclusion. In the abstract, the authors
wrote that metronidazole can significantly improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing
hemorrhoidectomy and is ‘safe’. The abstract and conclusion sections of the main manuscript
should be consistent.
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 16 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer comments to authors
Overall, this is a clear and well-written manuscript. The authors make a systematic contribution
to the research literature in this area of investigation. I have some concerns and suggestions
for each aspect of the manuscript. I also recommend that the authors to get an English editing
service.
Abstracts
Overall, the abstracts is clear, concise, and well-written.
Introduction
The introduction is relevant and theory based. Sufficient information about the previous study
findings is presented for readers to follow the present study rationale. However, it is redundant
and I recommend that you revise it to be shorter and more concise.
Material and methods
Overall, this is well-written and I have no suggestions.
Results
In general, the results are reasonable and logically consistent. Although the sample size is small,
the statistical results are expected to be somewhat reliable because the authors included only
randomized controlled trials that included placebo group in their statistical analysis. In ‘3.3.6
the Overall incidence of complications’ section, it would be good to briefly mention the types of
complications. Although the classification of complications varies by study, but it is necessary
to briefly mention them. No additional statistical analysis is required for this.
Discussion
The discussion section provides a relatively well-described scientific background supporting the
efficacy of metronidazole in reducing pain after hemorrhoid surgery. As the authors pointed
out, we cannot overlook the concerns about complications and the occurrence of resistant
strains after metronidazole administration. However, the authors' research results do not include
information about resistant strains after metronidazole administration, I recommend removing
the risk of ‘potential metronidazole resistance’ from the conclusion. In the abstract, the authors
wrote that metronidazole can significantly improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing
hemorrhoidectomy and is ‘safe’. The abstract and conclusion sections of the main manuscript
should be consistent.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2819_ReviewerReport_V0_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 3,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 2,
"materials_and_methods": 6,
"praise": 8,
"presentation_and_reporting": 8,
"results_and_discussion": 8,
"suggestion_and_solution": 7,
"total": 19
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.15789473684210525,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.10526315789473684,
"materials_and_methods": 0.3157894736842105,
"praise": 0.42105263157894735,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.42105263157894735,
"results_and_discussion": 0.42105263157894735,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.3684210526315789
}
| 2.210526
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis\nof Randomized Controlled Trials\nVersion: 0 Date: 16 Dec 2024\nReviewer's report:\nReviewer comments to authors\nOverall, this is a clear and well-written manuscript. The authors make a systematic contribution\nto the research literature in this area of investigation. I have some concerns and suggestions\nfor each aspect of the manuscript. I also recommend that the authors to get an English editing\nservice.\nAbstracts\nOverall, the abstracts is clear, concise, and well-written.\nIntroduction\nThe introduction is relevant and theory based. Sufficient information about the previous study\nfindings is presented for readers to follow the present study rationale. However, it is redundant\nand I recommend that you revise it to be shorter and more concise.\nMaterial and methods\nOverall, this is well-written and I have no suggestions.\nResults\nIn general, the results are reasonable and logically consistent. Although the sample size is small,\nthe statistical results are expected to be somewhat reliable because the authors included only\nrandomized controlled trials that included placebo group in their statistical analysis. In ‘3.3.6\nthe Overall incidence of complications’ section, it would be good to briefly mention the types of\ncomplications. Although the classification of complications varies by study, but it is necessary\nto briefly mention them. No additional statistical analysis is required for this.\nDiscussion\nThe discussion section provides a relatively well-described scientific background supporting the\nefficacy of metronidazole in reducing pain after hemorrhoid surgery. As the authors pointed\nout, we cannot overlook the concerns about complications and the occurrence of resistant\nstrains after metronidazole administration. However, the authors' research results do not include\ninformation about resistant strains after metronidazole administration, I recommend removing\nthe risk of ‘potential metronidazole resistance’ from the conclusion. In the abstract, the authors\nwrote that metronidazole can significantly improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing\nhemorrhoidectomy and is ‘safe’. The abstract and conclusion sections of the main manuscript\nshould be consistent.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02819-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 21 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Review of the Manuscript:
Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis of
Randomized Controlled Trials
Adherence to Guidelines
The manuscript should align with PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-
analyses. Key points to consider:
• PRISMA checklist inclusion.
• Adequate reporting of the selection process (PRISMA flowchart).
• Clear statement of the rationale for the review.
Identified Issues
1. Methodological Flaws
• Heterogeneity Issues: High heterogeneity (e.g., I2=88%I^2 = 88\%I2=88% for Day 1 pain
scores) undermines the reliability of findings. The random-effects model is appropriately used,
but subgroup analyses or meta-regression are absent. These methods could clarify sources of
heterogeneity.
• TSA Analysis: While TSA was performed, it indicated that while the sample size met the
required information size (RIS), the boundary was reached only with additional studies. This
suggests that further data may alter conclusions.
• GRADE Evidence Quality: Most outcomes have low GRADE ratings. This reflects limited
confidence in results, possibly due to bias or small sample sizes.
2. Data Presentation Issues
• Pain Scores: Sensitivity analysis reveals instability in Day 1 pain score findings, particularly
after removing a single study. This should be emphasized in the abstract and conclusion as a
major limitation.
• Complications and Safety: Although no significant difference in complications was found, the
lack of subgroup analyses for different administration routes (oral, intravenous, topical) raises
questions about generalizability.
3. Conclusion Validity
The conclusion that metronidazole "can significantly improve postoperative pain" is strong,
despite the outlined limitations. A more tempered conclusion is warranted, acknowledging the
low evidence quality and heterogeneity.
4. Structural and Logical Integrity
• Introduction: Strong rationale and well-contextualized background. However, the review focus
(metronidazole vs. placebo) should be better highlighted in relation to the broader literature on
pain management.
• Discussion: While comprehensive, the limitations section could more thoroughly address
potential biases (e.g., risk of publication bias, selection bias).
5. Ethical Considerations
The ethical section is missing. PRISMA-compliant reviews should state whether patient consent
or ethical approval is necessary for included trials. While this is typically reported in primary
studies, the lack of explicit mention here weakens ethical transparency.
Recommendations
Major Revisions
1. Heterogeneity Exploration: Conduct subgroup or sensitivity analyses focusing on:
o Administration routes.
o Surgery types (e.g., Milligan-Morgan vs. Ferguson).
o Variations in study quality.
2. GRADE Reporting: Provide detailed tables for GRADE assessments to justify low evidence
ratings. Include a discussion on how these ratings impact clinical applicability.
3. Abstract Revision: Highlight key limitations in the results section, particularly the sensitivity
analysis findings and heterogeneity.
Minor Revisions
1. Include a supplementary table detailing the characteristics of excluded studies (with reasons
for exclusion).
2. Ensure proper ethical disclosure about included studies (e.g., informed consent, ethical
approval).
Overall Assessment
The manuscript presents important findings on a clinically relevant topic. However, issues
related to heterogeneity, evidence quality, and conclusions need to be addressed to strengthen
the reliability and clinical applicability of the results.
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 0 Date: 21 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Review of the Manuscript:
Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis of
Randomized Controlled Trials
Adherence to Guidelines
The manuscript should align with PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-
analyses. Key points to consider:
• PRISMA checklist inclusion.
• Adequate reporting of the selection process (PRISMA flowchart).
• Clear statement of the rationale for the review.
Identified Issues
1. Methodological Flaws
• Heterogeneity Issues: High heterogeneity (e.g., I2=88%I^2 = 88\%I2=88% for Day 1 pain
scores) undermines the reliability of findings. The random-effects model is appropriately used,
but subgroup analyses or meta-regression are absent. These methods could clarify sources of
heterogeneity.
• TSA Analysis: While TSA was performed, it indicated that while the sample size met the
required information size (RIS), the boundary was reached only with additional studies. This
suggests that further data may alter conclusions.
• GRADE Evidence Quality: Most outcomes have low GRADE ratings. This reflects limited
confidence in results, possibly due to bias or small sample sizes.
2. Data Presentation Issues
• Pain Scores: Sensitivity analysis reveals instability in Day 1 pain score findings, particularly
after removing a single study. This should be emphasized in the abstract and conclusion as a
major limitation.
• Complications and Safety: Although no significant difference in complications was found, the
lack of subgroup analyses for different administration routes (oral, intravenous, topical) raises
questions about generalizability.
3. Conclusion Validity
The conclusion that metronidazole "can significantly improve postoperative pain" is strong,
despite the outlined limitations. A more tempered conclusion is warranted, acknowledging the
low evidence quality and heterogeneity.
4. Structural and Logical Integrity
• Introduction: Strong rationale and well-contextualized background. However, the review focus
(metronidazole vs. placebo) should be better highlighted in relation to the broader literature on
pain management.
• Discussion: While comprehensive, the limitations section could more thoroughly address
potential biases (e.g., risk of publication bias, selection bias).
5. Ethical Considerations
The ethical section is missing. PRISMA-compliant reviews should state whether patient consent
or ethical approval is necessary for included trials. While this is typically reported in primary
studies, the lack of explicit mention here weakens ethical transparency.
Recommendations
Major Revisions
1. Heterogeneity Exploration: Conduct subgroup or sensitivity analyses focusing on:
o Administration routes.
o Surgery types (e.g., Milligan-Morgan vs. Ferguson).
o Variations in study quality.
2. GRADE Reporting: Provide detailed tables for GRADE assessments to justify low evidence
ratings. Include a discussion on how these ratings impact clinical applicability.
3. Abstract Revision: Highlight key limitations in the results section, particularly the sensitivity
analysis findings and heterogeneity.
Minor Revisions
1. Include a supplementary table detailing the characteristics of excluded studies (with reasons
for exclusion).
2. Ensure proper ethical disclosure about included studies (e.g., informed consent, ethical
approval).
Overall Assessment
The manuscript presents important findings on a clinically relevant topic. However, issues
related to heterogeneity, evidence quality, and conclusions need to be addressed to strengthen
the reliability and clinical applicability of the results.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2819_ReviewerReport_V0_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 4,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 3,
"materials_and_methods": 16,
"praise": 3,
"presentation_and_reporting": 5,
"results_and_discussion": 13,
"suggestion_and_solution": 14,
"total": 42
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.09523809523809523,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.07142857142857142,
"materials_and_methods": 0.38095238095238093,
"praise": 0.07142857142857142,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.11904761904761904,
"results_and_discussion": 0.30952380952380953,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.3333333333333333
}
| 1.380952
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis\nof Randomized Controlled Trials\nVersion: 0 Date: 21 Jan 2025\nReviewer's report:\nReview of the Manuscript:\nEfficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis of\nRandomized Controlled Trials\nAdherence to Guidelines\nThe manuscript should align with PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-\nanalyses. Key points to consider:\n• PRISMA checklist inclusion.\n• Adequate reporting of the selection process (PRISMA flowchart).\n• Clear statement of the rationale for the review.\nIdentified Issues\n1. Methodological Flaws\n• Heterogeneity Issues: High heterogeneity (e.g., I2=88%I^2 = 88\\%I2=88% for Day 1 pain\nscores) undermines the reliability of findings. The random-effects model is appropriately used,\nbut subgroup analyses or meta-regression are absent. These methods could clarify sources of\nheterogeneity.\n• TSA Analysis: While TSA was performed, it indicated that while the sample size met the\nrequired information size (RIS), the boundary was reached only with additional studies. This\nsuggests that further data may alter conclusions.\n• GRADE Evidence Quality: Most outcomes have low GRADE ratings. This reflects limited\nconfidence in results, possibly due to bias or small sample sizes.\n2. Data Presentation Issues\n• Pain Scores: Sensitivity analysis reveals instability in Day 1 pain score findings, particularly\nafter removing a single study. This should be emphasized in the abstract and conclusion as a\nmajor limitation.\n• Complications and Safety: Although no significant difference in complications was found, the\nlack of subgroup analyses for different administration routes (oral, intravenous, topical) raises\nquestions about generalizability.\n3. Conclusion Validity\nThe conclusion that metronidazole \"can significantly improve postoperative pain\" is strong,\ndespite the outlined limitations. A more tempered conclusion is warranted, acknowledging the\nlow evidence quality and heterogeneity.\n4. Structural and Logical Integrity\n• Introduction: Strong rationale and well-contextualized background. However, the review focus\n(metronidazole vs. placebo) should be better highlighted in relation to the broader literature on\npain management.\n• Discussion: While comprehensive, the limitations section could more thoroughly address\npotential biases (e.g., risk of publication bias, selection bias).\n5. Ethical Considerations\nThe ethical section is missing. PRISMA-compliant reviews should state whether patient consent\nor ethical approval is necessary for included trials. While this is typically reported in primary\nstudies, the lack of explicit mention here weakens ethical transparency.\nRecommendations\nMajor Revisions\n1. Heterogeneity Exploration: Conduct subgroup or sensitivity analyses focusing on:\no Administration routes.\no Surgery types (e.g., Milligan-Morgan vs. Ferguson).\no Variations in study quality.\n2. GRADE Reporting: Provide detailed tables for GRADE assessments to justify low evidence\nratings. Include a discussion on how these ratings impact clinical applicability.\n3. Abstract Revision: Highlight key limitations in the results section, particularly the sensitivity\nanalysis findings and heterogeneity.\nMinor Revisions\n1. Include a supplementary table detailing the characteristics of excluded studies (with reasons\nfor exclusion).\n2. Ensure proper ethical disclosure about included studies (e.g., informed consent, ethical\napproval).\nOverall Assessment\nThe manuscript presents important findings on a clinically relevant topic. However, issues\nrelated to heterogeneity, evidence quality, and conclusions need to be addressed to strengthen\nthe reliability and clinical applicability of the results.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02819-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 1 Date: 04 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your thorough revisions. All my concerns have been addressed adequately, and
the manuscript is now suitable for publication.
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 1 Date: 04 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your thorough revisions. All my concerns have been addressed adequately, and
the manuscript is now suitable for publication.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2819_ReviewerReport_V1_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 0.5,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis\nof Randomized Controlled Trials\nVersion: 1 Date: 04 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nThank you for your thorough revisions. All my concerns have been addressed adequately, and\nthe manuscript is now suitable for publication.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02819-7
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 1 Date: 10 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer comments to authors
I have reviewed the authors' revised manuscript. I have no further comments on the revised
manuscript.
|
Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis
of Randomized Controlled Trials
Version: 1 Date: 10 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer comments to authors
I have reviewed the authors' revised manuscript. I have no further comments on the revised
manuscript.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2819_ReviewerReport_V1_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.5,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Efficacy of Metronidazole in Reducing Pain After Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis\nof Randomized Controlled Trials\nVersion: 1 Date: 10 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nReviewer comments to authors\nI have reviewed the authors' revised manuscript. I have no further comments on the revised\nmanuscript.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02813-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 20 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
I applaud the authors for this well conducted study.
However, the results section is very heterogeneous. It is like mixing apples and oranges. I see
that a reduction of this heterogeneity was attempted by doing a sub-analysis. But there are too
many sub-analysis.
I think it would be better to remove the in-vitro studies and keep the clinical studies only and
redo everything Accordingly.
I will be happy to review the manuscript after that
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 20 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
I applaud the authors for this well conducted study.
However, the results section is very heterogeneous. It is like mixing apples and oranges. I see
that a reduction of this heterogeneity was attempted by doing a sub-analysis. But there are too
many sub-analysis.
I think it would be better to remove the in-vitro studies and keep the clinical studies only and
redo everything Accordingly.
I will be happy to review the manuscript after that
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2813_ReviewerReport_V3_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 4,
"praise": 2,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 1,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 7
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.2857142857142857,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5714285714285714,
"praise": 0.2857142857142857,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0.14285714285714285,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.14285714285714285
}
| 1.428571
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and\nmeta-analysis\nVersion: 3 Date: 20 Jun 2024\nReviewer's report:\nI applaud the authors for this well conducted study.\nHowever, the results section is very heterogeneous. It is like mixing apples and oranges. I see\nthat a reduction of this heterogeneity was attempted by doing a sub-analysis. But there are too\nmany sub-analysis.\nI think it would be better to remove the in-vitro studies and keep the clinical studies only and\nredo everything Accordingly.\nI will be happy to review the manuscript after that",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02813-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 21 Sep 2024
Reviewer: Hui-Min Li
Reviewer's report:
1. What standard is used for nail placement accuracy? According to most literature, the Gertzbin
Robbins classification is used, Group A: screw position is within the paper#Group B: cortical
breach of less than 2 mm, Group C: cortical breach of 2 mm or more but less than 4 mm, Group
D: cortical breach of 4 mm or more but less than 6 mm, and Group E: cortical breach of 6 mm or
more)# The article does not differentiate based on levels, and this result needs to be reanalyzed.
2.“more advanced techniques (O-arm, 3D CT and robot) showed a greater beneficial effect
regarding accuracy (Figure 1).” The inclusion of relatively few comparative literatures in this
result requires further discussion regarding the conclusion reached.
3. The literature quality assessment criteria for RCTs require the use of Cochrane risk of bias
criteria.
4. There may be incomplete display of references, such as the eighth one.
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 21 Sep 2024
Reviewer: Hui-Min Li
Reviewer's report:
1. What standard is used for nail placement accuracy? According to most literature, the Gertzbin
Robbins classification is used, Group A: screw position is within the paper#Group B: cortical
breach of less than 2 mm, Group C: cortical breach of 2 mm or more but less than 4 mm, Group
D: cortical breach of 4 mm or more but less than 6 mm, and Group E: cortical breach of 6 mm or
more)# The article does not differentiate based on levels, and this result needs to be reanalyzed.
2.“more advanced techniques (O-arm, 3D CT and robot) showed a greater beneficial effect
regarding accuracy (Figure 1).” The inclusion of relatively few comparative literatures in this
result requires further discussion regarding the conclusion reached.
3. The literature quality assessment criteria for RCTs require the use of Cochrane risk of bias
criteria.
4. There may be incomplete display of references, such as the eighth one.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2813_ReviewerReport_V3_R3.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 5,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 1,
"results_and_discussion": 2,
"suggestion_and_solution": 3,
"total": 8
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0.125,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.625,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.125,
"results_and_discussion": 0.25,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.375
}
| 1.5
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and\nmeta-analysis\nVersion: 3 Date: 21 Sep 2024\nReviewer: Hui-Min Li\nReviewer's report:\n1. What standard is used for nail placement accuracy? According to most literature, the Gertzbin\nRobbins classification is used, Group A: screw position is within the paper#Group B: cortical\nbreach of less than 2 mm, Group C: cortical breach of 2 mm or more but less than 4 mm, Group\nD: cortical breach of 4 mm or more but less than 6 mm, and Group E: cortical breach of 6 mm or\nmore)# The article does not differentiate based on levels, and this result needs to be reanalyzed.\n2.“more advanced techniques (O-arm, 3D CT and robot) showed a greater beneficial effect\nregarding accuracy (Figure 1).” The inclusion of relatively few comparative literatures in this\nresult requires further discussion regarding the conclusion reached.\n3. The literature quality assessment criteria for RCTs require the use of Cochrane risk of bias\ncriteria.\n4. There may be incomplete display of references, such as the eighth one.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02813-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 01 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript was revised according to the reviewers comments
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 01 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript was revised according to the reviewers comments
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2813_ReviewerReport_V6_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and\nmeta-analysis\nVersion: 6 Date: 01 Jan 2025\nReviewer's report:\nThe manuscript was revised according to the reviewers comments",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02813-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 08 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Yu-Ning Peng
Reviewer's report:
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 08 Jan 2025
Reviewer: Yu-Ning Peng
Reviewer's report:
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2813_ReviewerReport_V6_R6.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and\nmeta-analysis\nVersion: 6 Date: 08 Jan 2025\nReviewer: Yu-Ning Peng\nReviewer's report:",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02813-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 19 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
1. Rich research literature and clear categorization: the study involves more related studies and
is categorized more meticulously, reflecting a broad understanding of the field and sufficient
literature collection work, which is worthy of recognition.
2. The discussion part is slightly simple: although the results of the study are analyzed in
the discussion part of the article, the depth is insufficient. It is recommended that the authors
combine the results of various studies to analyze and elaborate the advantages and shortcomings
of various new technologies in depth, so as to enhance the persuasiveness and academic value
of the article. In addition, the discussion of the research results should be sufficient and avoid
overly subjective and exaggerated claims. For example, the advantages of the technology can
be expressed as “Compared with traditional methods, the technology has greater advantages in
some aspects, but there are some limitations”.
|
Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
Version: 6 Date: 19 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
1. Rich research literature and clear categorization: the study involves more related studies and
is categorized more meticulously, reflecting a broad understanding of the field and sufficient
literature collection work, which is worthy of recognition.
2. The discussion part is slightly simple: although the results of the study are analyzed in
the discussion part of the article, the depth is insufficient. It is recommended that the authors
combine the results of various studies to analyze and elaborate the advantages and shortcomings
of various new technologies in depth, so as to enhance the persuasiveness and academic value
of the article. In addition, the discussion of the research results should be sufficient and avoid
overly subjective and exaggerated claims. For example, the advantages of the technology can
be expressed as “Compared with traditional methods, the technology has greater advantages in
some aspects, but there are some limitations”.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2813_ReviewerReport_V6_R7.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 3,
"materials_and_methods": 3,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 3,
"suggestion_and_solution": 2,
"total": 7
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.2857142857142857,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.42857142857142855,
"materials_and_methods": 0.42857142857142855,
"praise": 0.14285714285714285,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0.42857142857142855,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.2857142857142857
}
| 2
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Accuracy in navigated percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation: a systematic review and\nmeta-analysis\nVersion: 6 Date: 19 Jan 2025\nReviewer's report:\n1. Rich research literature and clear categorization: the study involves more related studies and\nis categorized more meticulously, reflecting a broad understanding of the field and sufficient\nliterature collection work, which is worthy of recognition.\n2. The discussion part is slightly simple: although the results of the study are analyzed in\nthe discussion part of the article, the depth is insufficient. It is recommended that the authors\ncombine the results of various studies to analyze and elaborate the advantages and shortcomings\nof various new technologies in depth, so as to enhance the persuasiveness and academic value\nof the article. In addition, the discussion of the research results should be sufficient and avoid\noverly subjective and exaggerated claims. For example, the advantages of the technology can\nbe expressed as “Compared with traditional methods, the technology has greater advantages in\nsome aspects, but there are some limitations”.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02817-9
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
In the manuscript, “Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for acute renal
failure requiring dialysis following heart transplantation: a retrospective study from China”
Qian and authors propose a model to predict acute renal failure requiring dialysis following
heart transplantation. Developed using logistic regression, the model consists of six indicators:
diabetes, stroke, gout, prognostic nutritional index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and
cardiopulmonary bypass duration and has a C-statistic of 0.792 in the derivation cohort and
0.834 in the validation cohort.
Qian et al.’s methods are well described and technically sound. Though a small dataset is used,
their conclusions are supported by their work. Their statistical analysis of the data is sound;
however, as the authors note in their limitations, no external or test set is used. This limits the
broader application of this prediction model. The location of the heart transplant recipients is
also unclear in the main manuscript. Are all patients from a single center? Where is the center
located in China?
Overall, this is a technically sound and interesting paper. I would suggest the authors include
more details regarding their cohort and, if possible, determine their model’s fit using a broader
test set. Finally, they should address minor spelling and syntax errors.
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
In the manuscript, “Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for acute renal
failure requiring dialysis following heart transplantation: a retrospective study from China”
Qian and authors propose a model to predict acute renal failure requiring dialysis following
heart transplantation. Developed using logistic regression, the model consists of six indicators:
diabetes, stroke, gout, prognostic nutritional index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and
cardiopulmonary bypass duration and has a C-statistic of 0.792 in the derivation cohort and
0.834 in the validation cohort.
Qian et al.’s methods are well described and technically sound. Though a small dataset is used,
their conclusions are supported by their work. Their statistical analysis of the data is sound;
however, as the authors note in their limitations, no external or test set is used. This limits the
broader application of this prediction model. The location of the heart transplant recipients is
also unclear in the main manuscript. Are all patients from a single center? Where is the center
located in China?
Overall, this is a technically sound and interesting paper. I would suggest the authors include
more details regarding their cohort and, if possible, determine their model’s fit using a broader
test set. Finally, they should address minor spelling and syntax errors.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2817_ReviewerReport_V1_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 1,
"materials_and_methods": 8,
"praise": 3,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 2,
"suggestion_and_solution": 2,
"total": 12
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.16666666666666666,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.08333333333333333,
"materials_and_methods": 0.6666666666666666,
"praise": 0.25,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.16666666666666666,
"results_and_discussion": 0.16666666666666666,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.16666666666666666
}
| 1.666667
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute\nkidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China\nVersion: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024\nReviewer's report:\nIn the manuscript, “Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for acute renal\nfailure requiring dialysis following heart transplantation: a retrospective study from China”\nQian and authors propose a model to predict acute renal failure requiring dialysis following\nheart transplantation. Developed using logistic regression, the model consists of six indicators:\ndiabetes, stroke, gout, prognostic nutritional index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and\ncardiopulmonary bypass duration and has a C-statistic of 0.792 in the derivation cohort and\n0.834 in the validation cohort.\nQian et al.’s methods are well described and technically sound. Though a small dataset is used,\ntheir conclusions are supported by their work. Their statistical analysis of the data is sound;\nhowever, as the authors note in their limitations, no external or test set is used. This limits the\nbroader application of this prediction model. The location of the heart transplant recipients is\nalso unclear in the main manuscript. Are all patients from a single center? Where is the center\nlocated in China?\nOverall, this is a technically sound and interesting paper. I would suggest the authors include\nmore details regarding their cohort and, if possible, determine their model’s fit using a broader\ntest set. Finally, they should address minor spelling and syntax errors.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02817-9
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comment 1: I recommend that the authors replace "acute renal failure" with "dialysis-requiring
acute kidney injury" throughout the article, as the primary outcome is specifically focused on
this scenario. Additionally, "acute kidney injury (AKI)" is a more commonly used term in recent
years, replacing the "acute renal failure."
Comment 2: The criteria for initiating kidney replacement therapy do not appear to include
metabolic acidosis and uremia, which are widely recognized and commonly used criteria in
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for AKI-related kidney replacement therapy. Could the
authors clarify or elaborate on this point?
": 1) SCr #400 µmol/L or 2-fold or more increase from the baseline; 2) oliguria, defined as
a urine flow #0.5 ml/kg/hour for #3 hours, despite optimization of systemic and pulmonary
hemodynamic; 3) serum potassium #6.0 mmol/L and unresponsive to insulin and diuretic
therapy."
Comment 3: The secondary outcome is all-cause mortality, but the observation period for this
outcome is not specified. In critical care studies, commonly used timeframes are in-hospital,
30-day, 60-day, or 90-day mortality. Please clarify the observation period for consistency and
comparability with other studies.
Comment 4: I recommend reorganizing the supplementary table to present the data as a word
document rather than an Excel file, as this format may be easier for readers to interpret.
Comment 5: Please provide a comparison of baseline characteristics between the dialysis-
requiring AKI and non-dialysis-requiring AKI cohorts. If feasible, include this as a
supplementary table or a table in the main text for a more comprehensive understanding of the
study population.
Comment 6: The authors demonstrated that a lower Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) was
associated with cardiac surgery-associated AKI. Other studies have reported similar findings
regarding the usefulness of PNI or the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR). I suggest citing
the below 3 references and discussing this evidence in the discussion section, as PNI is a readily
available and cost-effective tool for AKI risk stratification. This could enhance the clinical
relevance of your findings.
ref 1: The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and serum albumin as predictors of acute kidney injury
after coronary artery bypass grafting. Sci Rep. 2022 Sep 14;12(1):15438.
ref 2:Prognostic nutritional index as a predictive marker for acute kidney injury in adult critical
illness population: a systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis. J Intensive
Care. 2024 Apr 26;12(1):16.
ref 3:Association of Preoperative Prognostic Nutritional Index with Risk of Postoperative Acute
Kidney Injury: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients. 2023 Jun 28;15(13):2929.
doi: 10.3390/nu15132929
Comment 7: Both gout and uric acid levels were included in the analysis, but only gout was
identified as a risk factor. Could the authors elaborate on this finding? Additionally, consider
discussing why uric acid levels were not significant as a risk factor despite their known
association with gout and kidney disease.
Comment 8: The definitions of underlying conditions such as CKD, chronic liver disease,
and others should be explicitly provided. This ensures clarity and reproducibility of the study
methodology.
Comment 9: For an AKI study, it is essential to include the definition of baseline creatinine.
Comment 10: The secondary outcome is reported as all-cause mortality. However, the results
section does not include an evaluation of the model's prediction accuracy for this outcome. Please
provide the relevant metrics
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comment 1: I recommend that the authors replace "acute renal failure" with "dialysis-requiring
acute kidney injury" throughout the article, as the primary outcome is specifically focused on
this scenario. Additionally, "acute kidney injury (AKI)" is a more commonly used term in recent
years, replacing the "acute renal failure."
Comment 2: The criteria for initiating kidney replacement therapy do not appear to include
metabolic acidosis and uremia, which are widely recognized and commonly used criteria in
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for AKI-related kidney replacement therapy. Could the
authors clarify or elaborate on this point?
": 1) SCr #400 µmol/L or 2-fold or more increase from the baseline; 2) oliguria, defined as
a urine flow #0.5 ml/kg/hour for #3 hours, despite optimization of systemic and pulmonary
hemodynamic; 3) serum potassium #6.0 mmol/L and unresponsive to insulin and diuretic
therapy."
Comment 3: The secondary outcome is all-cause mortality, but the observation period for this
outcome is not specified. In critical care studies, commonly used timeframes are in-hospital,
30-day, 60-day, or 90-day mortality. Please clarify the observation period for consistency and
comparability with other studies.
Comment 4: I recommend reorganizing the supplementary table to present the data as a word
document rather than an Excel file, as this format may be easier for readers to interpret.
Comment 5: Please provide a comparison of baseline characteristics between the dialysis-
requiring AKI and non-dialysis-requiring AKI cohorts. If feasible, include this as a
supplementary table or a table in the main text for a more comprehensive understanding of the
study population.
Comment 6: The authors demonstrated that a lower Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) was
associated with cardiac surgery-associated AKI. Other studies have reported similar findings
regarding the usefulness of PNI or the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR). I suggest citing
the below 3 references and discussing this evidence in the discussion section, as PNI is a readily
available and cost-effective tool for AKI risk stratification. This could enhance the clinical
relevance of your findings.
ref 1: The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and serum albumin as predictors of acute kidney injury
after coronary artery bypass grafting. Sci Rep. 2022 Sep 14;12(1):15438.
ref 2:Prognostic nutritional index as a predictive marker for acute kidney injury in adult critical
illness population: a systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis. J Intensive
Care. 2024 Apr 26;12(1):16.
ref 3:Association of Preoperative Prognostic Nutritional Index with Risk of Postoperative Acute
Kidney Injury: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients. 2023 Jun 28;15(13):2929.
doi: 10.3390/nu15132929
Comment 7: Both gout and uric acid levels were included in the analysis, but only gout was
identified as a risk factor. Could the authors elaborate on this finding? Additionally, consider
discussing why uric acid levels were not significant as a risk factor despite their known
association with gout and kidney disease.
Comment 8: The definitions of underlying conditions such as CKD, chronic liver disease,
and others should be explicitly provided. This ensures clarity and reproducibility of the study
methodology.
Comment 9: For an AKI study, it is essential to include the definition of baseline creatinine.
Comment 10: The secondary outcome is reported as all-cause mortality. However, the results
section does not include an evaluation of the model's prediction accuracy for this outcome. Please
provide the relevant metrics
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2817_ReviewerReport_V1_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 3,
"materials_and_methods": 20,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 9,
"results_and_discussion": 8,
"suggestion_and_solution": 12,
"total": 29
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.06896551724137931,
"example": 0.034482758620689655,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.10344827586206896,
"materials_and_methods": 0.6896551724137931,
"praise": 0.034482758620689655,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.3103448275862069,
"results_and_discussion": 0.27586206896551724,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.41379310344827586
}
| 1.931034
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute\nkidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China\nVersion: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2024\nReviewer's report:\nComment 1: I recommend that the authors replace \"acute renal failure\" with \"dialysis-requiring\nacute kidney injury\" throughout the article, as the primary outcome is specifically focused on\nthis scenario. Additionally, \"acute kidney injury (AKI)\" is a more commonly used term in recent\nyears, replacing the \"acute renal failure.\"\nComment 2: The criteria for initiating kidney replacement therapy do not appear to include\nmetabolic acidosis and uremia, which are widely recognized and commonly used criteria in\nrandomized controlled trials (RCTs) for AKI-related kidney replacement therapy. Could the\nauthors clarify or elaborate on this point?\n\": 1) SCr #400 µmol/L or 2-fold or more increase from the baseline; 2) oliguria, defined as\na urine flow #0.5 ml/kg/hour for #3 hours, despite optimization of systemic and pulmonary\nhemodynamic; 3) serum potassium #6.0 mmol/L and unresponsive to insulin and diuretic\ntherapy.\"\nComment 3: The secondary outcome is all-cause mortality, but the observation period for this\noutcome is not specified. In critical care studies, commonly used timeframes are in-hospital,\n30-day, 60-day, or 90-day mortality. Please clarify the observation period for consistency and\ncomparability with other studies.\nComment 4: I recommend reorganizing the supplementary table to present the data as a word\ndocument rather than an Excel file, as this format may be easier for readers to interpret.\nComment 5: Please provide a comparison of baseline characteristics between the dialysis-\nrequiring AKI and non-dialysis-requiring AKI cohorts. If feasible, include this as a\nsupplementary table or a table in the main text for a more comprehensive understanding of the\nstudy population.\nComment 6: The authors demonstrated that a lower Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) was\nassociated with cardiac surgery-associated AKI. Other studies have reported similar findings\nregarding the usefulness of PNI or the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR). I suggest citing\nthe below 3 references and discussing this evidence in the discussion section, as PNI is a readily\navailable and cost-effective tool for AKI risk stratification. This could enhance the clinical\nrelevance of your findings.\nref 1: The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and serum albumin as predictors of acute kidney injury\nafter coronary artery bypass grafting. Sci Rep. 2022 Sep 14;12(1):15438.\nref 2:Prognostic nutritional index as a predictive marker for acute kidney injury in adult critical\nillness population: a systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis. J Intensive\nCare. 2024 Apr 26;12(1):16.\nref 3:Association of Preoperative Prognostic Nutritional Index with Risk of Postoperative Acute\nKidney Injury: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients. 2023 Jun 28;15(13):2929.\ndoi: 10.3390/nu15132929\nComment 7: Both gout and uric acid levels were included in the analysis, but only gout was\nidentified as a risk factor. Could the authors elaborate on this finding? Additionally, consider\ndiscussing why uric acid levels were not significant as a risk factor despite their known\nassociation with gout and kidney disease.\nComment 8: The definitions of underlying conditions such as CKD, chronic liver disease,\nand others should be explicitly provided. This ensures clarity and reproducibility of the study\nmethodology.\nComment 9: For an AKI study, it is essential to include the definition of baseline creatinine.\nComment 10: The secondary outcome is reported as all-cause mortality. However, the results\nsection does not include an evaluation of the model's prediction accuracy for this outcome. Please\nprovide the relevant metrics",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02817-9
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 2 Date: 15 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
my comments have been responded appropriately
|
Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute
kidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China
Version: 2 Date: 15 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
my comments have been responded appropriately
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2817_ReviewerReport_V2_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for dialysis-requiring acute\nkidney injury following heart transplantation: a single-center study from China\nVersion: 2 Date: 15 Jan 2025\nReviewer's report:\nmy comments have been responded appropriately",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity of reading your paper.
I believe your paper shows that compared to the poor dispersion group, patients in the good
dispersion group have a better short-term clinical response, and in addition, the good dispersion
group can significantly reduce the incidence of fracture and re-fracture rates of the entire injured
vertebral body, thus achieving better surgical outcomes, clinical effectiveness, and prognosis.
Would you please tell me your thought to my question? I am looking forward to seeing it.
1 As stated in the Limitation, is there truly a consensus to classify good or poor vertebral
distribution based solely on the cement spread in the coronal plane of the x-ray?
2 There is no mention of when surgical treatment was performed after the fracture occurred. Is
there any difference in the timing of the surgical procedure performed?
It is not clear in this paper whether the difference in intravertebral widening is technical, surgical
timing, or otherwise. Please specify the reason for the difference in cement distribution.
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity of reading your paper.
I believe your paper shows that compared to the poor dispersion group, patients in the good
dispersion group have a better short-term clinical response, and in addition, the good dispersion
group can significantly reduce the incidence of fracture and re-fracture rates of the entire injured
vertebral body, thus achieving better surgical outcomes, clinical effectiveness, and prognosis.
Would you please tell me your thought to my question? I am looking forward to seeing it.
1 As stated in the Limitation, is there truly a consensus to classify good or poor vertebral
distribution based solely on the cement spread in the coronal plane of the x-ray?
2 There is no mention of when surgical treatment was performed after the fracture occurred. Is
there any difference in the timing of the surgical procedure performed?
It is not clear in this paper whether the difference in intravertebral widening is technical, surgical
timing, or otherwise. Please specify the reason for the difference in cement distribution.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V1_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 2,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 5,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 2,
"total": 9
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.2222222222222222,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5555555555555556,
"praise": 0.1111111111111111,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.2222222222222222,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.2222222222222222
}
| 1.333333
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 1 Date: 23 Jun 2024\nReviewer's report:\nThank you for giving me the opportunity of reading your paper.\nI believe your paper shows that compared to the poor dispersion group, patients in the good\ndispersion group have a better short-term clinical response, and in addition, the good dispersion\ngroup can significantly reduce the incidence of fracture and re-fracture rates of the entire injured\nvertebral body, thus achieving better surgical outcomes, clinical effectiveness, and prognosis.\nWould you please tell me your thought to my question? I am looking forward to seeing it.\n1 As stated in the Limitation, is there truly a consensus to classify good or poor vertebral\ndistribution based solely on the cement spread in the coronal plane of the x-ray?\n2 There is no mention of when surgical treatment was performed after the fracture occurred. Is\nthere any difference in the timing of the surgical procedure performed?\nIt is not clear in this paper whether the difference in intravertebral widening is technical, surgical\ntiming, or otherwise. Please specify the reason for the difference in cement distribution.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 1 Date: 26 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
Vertebroplasty is a very effective surgical procedure for osteoporotic vertebral fractures. It is
widely used today. Increasing cases of osteoporosis due to the increase in the elderly population
cause these fractures to be seen more. The article is very meaningful in this respect. In addition,
its purpose is very well-designed. The short and medium term results are promising as expected.
It would be useful to see the long term results. My only criticism about the article is my concerns
about the good distribution of percutaneous injection performed unilaterally.
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 1 Date: 26 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
Vertebroplasty is a very effective surgical procedure for osteoporotic vertebral fractures. It is
widely used today. Increasing cases of osteoporosis due to the increase in the elderly population
cause these fractures to be seen more. The article is very meaningful in this respect. In addition,
its purpose is very well-designed. The short and medium term results are promising as expected.
It would be useful to see the long term results. My only criticism about the article is my concerns
about the good distribution of percutaneous injection performed unilaterally.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V1_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 2,
"praise": 6,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 2,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 8
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.125,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.25,
"praise": 0.75,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0.25,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.125
}
| 1.5
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 1 Date: 26 Nov 2024\nReviewer's report:\nVertebroplasty is a very effective surgical procedure for osteoporotic vertebral fractures. It is\nwidely used today. Increasing cases of osteoporosis due to the increase in the elderly population\ncause these fractures to be seen more. The article is very meaningful in this respect. In addition,\nits purpose is very well-designed. The short and medium term results are promising as expected.\nIt would be useful to see the long term results. My only criticism about the article is my concerns\nabout the good distribution of percutaneous injection performed unilaterally.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 2 Date: 07 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I am pleased to review the paper entitled "Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous
vertebral cement distribution in the repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression
fractures". This article is of great interest because it focuses on orthopedic-related clinical
scenarios that may affect the clinical practice of thoracolumbar fracture management. This study
is innovative and scientific nature.
Here is my secondary opinion on this article#
1.For the diffusion distribution of bone cement, the author only evaluated the coronal dispersion,
but did not mention the sagittal dispersion, whether the conclusions can be used by other
clinicians, and suggested to explain the reasons for not including the sagittal dispersion
distribution;
2.In the process of postoperative treatment, the author mentioned that "both groups of patients
were given zoledronic acid", without the improvement of bone metabolism examination,
whether it is advisable to directly give zoledronic acid, and whether the patients have received
bisphosphonate drugs in the past, and whether the above variables affect the presentation of the
conclusion;
3.What are the main causes of poor or uniform cement distribution: the surgical technique or the
type of fracture (including compression characteristics, time after injury, bone density, defect
of the cortical bone margin)?
4.(1) Does the fracture type affect the bone cement distribution?(2) Is the type of fracture (injury
mechanism, degree and type of vertebral injury) related to the prognosis under conservative
treatment? Before clarifying the above two issues, the logical relationship between the surgical
technique-cement distribution and prognosis should be carefully inferred. Avoid the emergence,
but there is a related relationship, but not a direct relationship, but a companion relationship.
5.Is the vertebral body height recovery rate in the unit of%?
6.In the statistical method, combined with the author's data presentation, the repeated
measurement variance analysis should be improved;
7.Figure 3 suggests that the author use the original image;
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 2 Date: 07 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I am pleased to review the paper entitled "Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous
vertebral cement distribution in the repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression
fractures". This article is of great interest because it focuses on orthopedic-related clinical
scenarios that may affect the clinical practice of thoracolumbar fracture management. This study
is innovative and scientific nature.
Here is my secondary opinion on this article#
1.For the diffusion distribution of bone cement, the author only evaluated the coronal dispersion,
but did not mention the sagittal dispersion, whether the conclusions can be used by other
clinicians, and suggested to explain the reasons for not including the sagittal dispersion
distribution;
2.In the process of postoperative treatment, the author mentioned that "both groups of patients
were given zoledronic acid", without the improvement of bone metabolism examination,
whether it is advisable to directly give zoledronic acid, and whether the patients have received
bisphosphonate drugs in the past, and whether the above variables affect the presentation of the
conclusion;
3.What are the main causes of poor or uniform cement distribution: the surgical technique or the
type of fracture (including compression characteristics, time after injury, bone density, defect
of the cortical bone margin)?
4.(1) Does the fracture type affect the bone cement distribution?(2) Is the type of fracture (injury
mechanism, degree and type of vertebral injury) related to the prognosis under conservative
treatment? Before clarifying the above two issues, the logical relationship between the surgical
technique-cement distribution and prognosis should be carefully inferred. Avoid the emergence,
but there is a related relationship, but not a direct relationship, but a companion relationship.
5.Is the vertebral body height recovery rate in the unit of%?
6.In the statistical method, combined with the author's data presentation, the repeated
measurement variance analysis should be improved;
7.Figure 3 suggests that the author use the original image;
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V2_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 2,
"materials_and_methods": 6,
"praise": 3,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 2,
"suggestion_and_solution": 2,
"total": 11
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0.09090909090909091,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.18181818181818182,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5454545454545454,
"praise": 0.2727272727272727,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.18181818181818182,
"results_and_discussion": 0.18181818181818182,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.18181818181818182
}
| 1.636364
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 2 Date: 07 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nI am pleased to review the paper entitled \"Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous\nvertebral cement distribution in the repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression\nfractures\". This article is of great interest because it focuses on orthopedic-related clinical\nscenarios that may affect the clinical practice of thoracolumbar fracture management. This study\nis innovative and scientific nature.\nHere is my secondary opinion on this article#\n1.For the diffusion distribution of bone cement, the author only evaluated the coronal dispersion,\nbut did not mention the sagittal dispersion, whether the conclusions can be used by other\nclinicians, and suggested to explain the reasons for not including the sagittal dispersion\ndistribution;\n2.In the process of postoperative treatment, the author mentioned that \"both groups of patients\nwere given zoledronic acid\", without the improvement of bone metabolism examination,\nwhether it is advisable to directly give zoledronic acid, and whether the patients have received\nbisphosphonate drugs in the past, and whether the above variables affect the presentation of the\nconclusion;\n3.What are the main causes of poor or uniform cement distribution: the surgical technique or the\ntype of fracture (including compression characteristics, time after injury, bone density, defect\nof the cortical bone margin)?\n4.(1) Does the fracture type affect the bone cement distribution?(2) Is the type of fracture (injury\nmechanism, degree and type of vertebral injury) related to the prognosis under conservative\ntreatment? Before clarifying the above two issues, the logical relationship between the surgical\ntechnique-cement distribution and prognosis should be carefully inferred. Avoid the emergence,\nbut there is a related relationship, but not a direct relationship, but a companion relationship. \n5.Is the vertebral body height recovery rate in the unit of%?\n6.In the statistical method, combined with the author's data presentation, the repeated\nmeasurement variance analysis should be improved;\n7.Figure 3 suggests that the author use the original image;",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 2 Date: 08 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
This study aims to investigate the impact of bone cement distribution on the efficacy of
vertebral compression fracture repair, to provide effective preventive and therapeutic measures,
prevent postoperative vertebral re-fracture, and improve surgical outcomes.I think this is a very
interesting article, but the following points need to be clarified.
Is there a statistical difference in the recovery rate of vertebral height, vertebral local kyphosis
angle and preoperative comparison at 1 week between the two groups?
2.Abstract: The author mentioned that "there are statistical difference between the refracture
and overall fracture incidence of the two groups", and then "refracture" was described as no
statistical difference between the two groups;
3.The exclusion criteria should be more rigorous, such as the contents of serious basic diseases,
whether tumors and immune system diseases are excluded, the criteria for osteoporosis in the
inclusion criteria, and whether to compare or consider osteoporosis and patients with reduced
bone mass within the group? Is the expression of postoperative vitamin D medication during
postoperative treatment correct? Are there other self-administered drugs?
4.In the table, the results of the comparison between the two groups should be marked with
special symbols such as *, #, and marked with the P-value range.
5.Comments on the results: a distinction should be made between osteoporosis and bone loss,
because the follow-up period is only 12 months, and the long-term prognosis in the full text
should be modified, which is still an observation of short-term efficacy overall.
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 2 Date: 08 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
This study aims to investigate the impact of bone cement distribution on the efficacy of
vertebral compression fracture repair, to provide effective preventive and therapeutic measures,
prevent postoperative vertebral re-fracture, and improve surgical outcomes.I think this is a very
interesting article, but the following points need to be clarified.
Is there a statistical difference in the recovery rate of vertebral height, vertebral local kyphosis
angle and preoperative comparison at 1 week between the two groups?
2.Abstract: The author mentioned that "there are statistical difference between the refracture
and overall fracture incidence of the two groups", and then "refracture" was described as no
statistical difference between the two groups;
3.The exclusion criteria should be more rigorous, such as the contents of serious basic diseases,
whether tumors and immune system diseases are excluded, the criteria for osteoporosis in the
inclusion criteria, and whether to compare or consider osteoporosis and patients with reduced
bone mass within the group? Is the expression of postoperative vitamin D medication during
postoperative treatment correct? Are there other self-administered drugs?
4.In the table, the results of the comparison between the two groups should be marked with
special symbols such as *, #, and marked with the P-value range.
5.Comments on the results: a distinction should be made between osteoporosis and bone loss,
because the follow-up period is only 12 months, and the long-term prognosis in the full text
should be modified, which is still an observation of short-term efficacy overall.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V2_R3.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 1,
"importance_and_relevance": 1,
"materials_and_methods": 3,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 3,
"results_and_discussion": 3,
"suggestion_and_solution": 4,
"total": 7
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0.14285714285714285,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.14285714285714285,
"materials_and_methods": 0.42857142857142855,
"praise": 0.14285714285714285,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.42857142857142855,
"results_and_discussion": 0.42857142857142855,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.5714285714285714
}
| 2.285714
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 2 Date: 08 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nThis study aims to investigate the impact of bone cement distribution on the efficacy of\nvertebral compression fracture repair, to provide effective preventive and therapeutic measures,\nprevent postoperative vertebral re-fracture, and improve surgical outcomes.I think this is a very\ninteresting article, but the following points need to be clarified.\nIs there a statistical difference in the recovery rate of vertebral height, vertebral local kyphosis\nangle and preoperative comparison at 1 week between the two groups?\n2.Abstract: The author mentioned that \"there are statistical difference between the refracture\nand overall fracture incidence of the two groups\", and then \"refracture\" was described as no\nstatistical difference between the two groups;\n3.The exclusion criteria should be more rigorous, such as the contents of serious basic diseases,\nwhether tumors and immune system diseases are excluded, the criteria for osteoporosis in the\ninclusion criteria, and whether to compare or consider osteoporosis and patients with reduced\nbone mass within the group? Is the expression of postoperative vitamin D medication during\npostoperative treatment correct? Are there other self-administered drugs?\n4.In the table, the results of the comparison between the two groups should be marked with\nspecial symbols such as *, #, and marked with the P-value range.\n5.Comments on the results: a distinction should be made between osteoporosis and bone loss,\nbecause the follow-up period is only 12 months, and the long-term prognosis in the full text\nshould be modified, which is still an observation of short-term efficacy overall.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Excellent! It is recommended to accept publication.
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Excellent! It is recommended to accept publication.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V4_R3.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 2,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 1,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.5
}
| 2
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\nExcellent! It is recommended to accept publication.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
good#Accept
|
Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the
repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures
Version: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
good#Accept
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2820_ReviewerReport_V4_R4.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 1
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 0,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the\nrepair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures\nVersion: 4 Date: 15 Feb 2025\nReviewer's report:\ngood#Accept",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02821-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 3 Date: 29 Jul 2024
Reviewer: Badria Aljohani
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript titled "Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume
Replacement after Breast-Conserving Surgery" by JinAh Kwon et al. provides a retrospective
analysis of the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to
improve cosmetic outcomes. The study is valuable for its focus on quantifying ADM volume
retention and the associated complications, offering critical insights into the utility of ADM in
oncoplastic surgery.
Abstract
The abstract adequately summarizes the study's aims, methods, and key findings. However, it
can be enhanced by ;
Mentioning the percentage decrease in ADM volume and the exact rate of complications
observed.
The statistical significance (p-value) and its implications should be explicitly stated.
Discussing how the findings impact clinical decisions or patient outcomes would strengthen the
abstract.
Introduction;
The introduction effectively contextualizes the study within the field of breast surgery and ADM
use. However, it can be improved by:
Including a broader range of studies on ADM use in breast surgery and its alternatives would
provide a more comprehensive background.
Clearly articulating the gaps in current research that this study addresses, especially the lack of
quantitative data on ADM volume retention over time.
Methods
The methodology is well-described, but there are areas that require additional details:
The criteria for including patients need more detail, including any exclusion criteria and potential
biases introduced by the selection process.
A more thorough description of the CT-based volumetric analysis, including any validation
of the method and inter-observer reliability assessments, would enhance the robustness of the
findings.
Justify the choice of statistical tests used and discuss any adjustments made for potential
confounding factors, such as differences in patient demographics or treatment modalities (e.g.,
radiotherapy).
Results
The results section presents comprehensive data but could be further refined:
A deeper analysis of the complications, including a comparison with rates from other studies,
would provide context and highlight the safety profile of ADM use.
Including analyses based on different patient characteristics (e.g., age, tumor location, adjuvant
therapy) could provide more nuanced insights.
Clearly stating the clinical significance of the findings, beyond statistical significance, would
help readers understand the practical implications.
Discussion
The discussion provides a reasonable interpretation of the results but would benefit from:
A more detailed comparison with similar studies, especially regarding ADM volume retention
and cosmetic outcomes, would help situate the study's findings within the broader research
landscape.
Discussing specific clinical recommendations based on the findings, such as patient selection
criteria for ADM use, would be valuable for practitioners.
While the study's limitations are acknowledged, a more detailed discussion on potential biases,
the impact of the single-center design, and areas for future research (e.g., long-term outcomes)
would strengthen the manuscript.
Conclusion
The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings but should:
Clearly state how the findings can influence clinical practice, particularly in terms of improving
cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction.
Propose specific areas for future studies, such as exploring alternative materials or techniques
for ADM placement and longer follow-up periods to assess long-term outcomes.
Tables
Table 1: Characteristics of Included Patients
Consider adding a footnote to clarify the method used for calculating specimen volume and
weight, as this might influence the interpretation of the data.
Ensure that the formatting is consistent, especially in how ranges are presented (e.g., consistently
using parentheses).
Table 2: Biopsy on Subsequent Follow-Up Examination
Consider specifying whether the imaging modalities used were consistent across all patients, or
if there were variations depending on the clinical scenario.
Adding a summary statistic, such as the percentage of patients with benign vs. malignant
findings, would provide a quick reference for readers.
General Recommendations for All Tables
Uniform Formatting:
Ensure that all tables use a consistent style, including font size, heading format, and the
presentation of numerical data.
Statistical Information:
Where applicable, include p-values or other statistical measures to indicate the significance of
differences or findings.
Footnotes and Abbreviations:
Always define abbreviations and include explanatory notes for any complex terms or
classifications used in the tables.
Consistency with Text:
Ensure that the data presented in the tables is consistent with the descriptions and interpretations
provided in the main text of the manuscript.
References
Some entries might lack complete information, such as issue numbers for journals. For instance:
Reference 3: "Kim SY, Ph D. Comparison of wound closure using ADM with primary wound
closure after BCS in breast cancer patients. J Breast Dis. 2022;10:12-7." It's unclear if "Ph D"
is part of the author name or a designation; it should be consistent with the rest of the author
list. Additionally, ensure that all elements like volume, issue, and page numbers are present and
correct.
Ensure that DOIs are included where available, as they provide a direct link to the sources.
Verify each reference against the original publication to ensure all details (authors, titles, journal
name, volume, issue, pages) are accurate. For instance:
Reference 10: "An J, Kwon H, Lim W, Moon BI, Paik NS. The comparison of breast
reconstruction using two types of acellular dermal matrix after breast-conserving surgery. J Clin
Med. 2021;10:3430." Ensure that the volume number and page range are accurate and that the
correct article title is used.
Ensure that all journal names are consistently abbreviated or written in full and are italicized if
required by the citation style.
For example, some references have "J Breast Cancer" while others use full titles. Choose one
format and apply it uniformly.
For references with multiple authors, list the first six followed by "et al." if there are more than
six authors, unless the journal's citation style requires listing all authors.
Overall Recommendations for Revision
Enhance the Abstract and Introduction: Include more specific details and context to better frame
the study's significance.
Clarify and Expand Methodological Details: Provide comprehensive information on patient
selection, ADM measurement techniques, and statistical analysis.
Provide Detailed Results and Discussion: Offer a more in-depth analysis of the results and their
implications, including a thorough comparison with existing literature and detailed discussion
of limitations.
Acknowledge Limitations and Suggest Future Research: Address potential biases and propose
directions for future studies.
Recommendation
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 3 Date: 29 Jul 2024
Reviewer: Badria Aljohani
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript titled "Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume
Replacement after Breast-Conserving Surgery" by JinAh Kwon et al. provides a retrospective
analysis of the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to
improve cosmetic outcomes. The study is valuable for its focus on quantifying ADM volume
retention and the associated complications, offering critical insights into the utility of ADM in
oncoplastic surgery.
Abstract
The abstract adequately summarizes the study's aims, methods, and key findings. However, it
can be enhanced by ;
Mentioning the percentage decrease in ADM volume and the exact rate of complications
observed.
The statistical significance (p-value) and its implications should be explicitly stated.
Discussing how the findings impact clinical decisions or patient outcomes would strengthen the
abstract.
Introduction;
The introduction effectively contextualizes the study within the field of breast surgery and ADM
use. However, it can be improved by:
Including a broader range of studies on ADM use in breast surgery and its alternatives would
provide a more comprehensive background.
Clearly articulating the gaps in current research that this study addresses, especially the lack of
quantitative data on ADM volume retention over time.
Methods
The methodology is well-described, but there are areas that require additional details:
The criteria for including patients need more detail, including any exclusion criteria and potential
biases introduced by the selection process.
A more thorough description of the CT-based volumetric analysis, including any validation
of the method and inter-observer reliability assessments, would enhance the robustness of the
findings.
Justify the choice of statistical tests used and discuss any adjustments made for potential
confounding factors, such as differences in patient demographics or treatment modalities (e.g.,
radiotherapy).
Results
The results section presents comprehensive data but could be further refined:
A deeper analysis of the complications, including a comparison with rates from other studies,
would provide context and highlight the safety profile of ADM use.
Including analyses based on different patient characteristics (e.g., age, tumor location, adjuvant
therapy) could provide more nuanced insights.
Clearly stating the clinical significance of the findings, beyond statistical significance, would
help readers understand the practical implications.
Discussion
The discussion provides a reasonable interpretation of the results but would benefit from:
A more detailed comparison with similar studies, especially regarding ADM volume retention
and cosmetic outcomes, would help situate the study's findings within the broader research
landscape.
Discussing specific clinical recommendations based on the findings, such as patient selection
criteria for ADM use, would be valuable for practitioners.
While the study's limitations are acknowledged, a more detailed discussion on potential biases,
the impact of the single-center design, and areas for future research (e.g., long-term outcomes)
would strengthen the manuscript.
Conclusion
The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings but should:
Clearly state how the findings can influence clinical practice, particularly in terms of improving
cosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction.
Propose specific areas for future studies, such as exploring alternative materials or techniques
for ADM placement and longer follow-up periods to assess long-term outcomes.
Tables
Table 1: Characteristics of Included Patients
Consider adding a footnote to clarify the method used for calculating specimen volume and
weight, as this might influence the interpretation of the data.
Ensure that the formatting is consistent, especially in how ranges are presented (e.g., consistently
using parentheses).
Table 2: Biopsy on Subsequent Follow-Up Examination
Consider specifying whether the imaging modalities used were consistent across all patients, or
if there were variations depending on the clinical scenario.
Adding a summary statistic, such as the percentage of patients with benign vs. malignant
findings, would provide a quick reference for readers.
General Recommendations for All Tables
Uniform Formatting:
Ensure that all tables use a consistent style, including font size, heading format, and the
presentation of numerical data.
Statistical Information:
Where applicable, include p-values or other statistical measures to indicate the significance of
differences or findings.
Footnotes and Abbreviations:
Always define abbreviations and include explanatory notes for any complex terms or
classifications used in the tables.
Consistency with Text:
Ensure that the data presented in the tables is consistent with the descriptions and interpretations
provided in the main text of the manuscript.
References
Some entries might lack complete information, such as issue numbers for journals. For instance:
Reference 3: "Kim SY, Ph D. Comparison of wound closure using ADM with primary wound
closure after BCS in breast cancer patients. J Breast Dis. 2022;10:12-7." It's unclear if "Ph D"
is part of the author name or a designation; it should be consistent with the rest of the author
list. Additionally, ensure that all elements like volume, issue, and page numbers are present and
correct.
Ensure that DOIs are included where available, as they provide a direct link to the sources.
Verify each reference against the original publication to ensure all details (authors, titles, journal
name, volume, issue, pages) are accurate. For instance:
Reference 10: "An J, Kwon H, Lim W, Moon BI, Paik NS. The comparison of breast
reconstruction using two types of acellular dermal matrix after breast-conserving surgery. J Clin
Med. 2021;10:3430." Ensure that the volume number and page range are accurate and that the
correct article title is used.
Ensure that all journal names are consistently abbreviated or written in full and are italicized if
required by the citation style.
For example, some references have "J Breast Cancer" while others use full titles. Choose one
format and apply it uniformly.
For references with multiple authors, list the first six followed by "et al." if there are more than
six authors, unless the journal's citation style requires listing all authors.
Overall Recommendations for Revision
Enhance the Abstract and Introduction: Include more specific details and context to better frame
the study's significance.
Clarify and Expand Methodological Details: Provide comprehensive information on patient
selection, ADM measurement techniques, and statistical analysis.
Provide Detailed Results and Discussion: Offer a more in-depth analysis of the results and their
implications, including a thorough comparison with existing literature and detailed discussion
of limitations.
Acknowledge Limitations and Suggest Future Research: Address potential biases and propose
directions for future studies.
Recommendation
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2821_ReviewerReport_V3_R2.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 6,
"importance_and_relevance": 11,
"materials_and_methods": 23,
"praise": 7,
"presentation_and_reporting": 23,
"results_and_discussion": 14,
"suggestion_and_solution": 36,
"total": 52
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0.11538461538461539,
"importance_and_relevance": 0.21153846153846154,
"materials_and_methods": 0.4423076923076923,
"praise": 0.1346153846153846,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.4423076923076923,
"results_and_discussion": 0.2692307692307692,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.6923076923076923
}
| 2.307692
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement\nafter Breast-Conserving Surgery\nVersion: 3 Date: 29 Jul 2024\nReviewer: Badria Aljohani\nReviewer's report:\nThe manuscript titled \"Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume\nReplacement after Breast-Conserving Surgery\" by JinAh Kwon et al. provides a retrospective\nanalysis of the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to\nimprove cosmetic outcomes. The study is valuable for its focus on quantifying ADM volume\nretention and the associated complications, offering critical insights into the utility of ADM in\noncoplastic surgery.\nAbstract\nThe abstract adequately summarizes the study's aims, methods, and key findings. However, it\ncan be enhanced by ;\nMentioning the percentage decrease in ADM volume and the exact rate of complications\nobserved.\nThe statistical significance (p-value) and its implications should be explicitly stated.\nDiscussing how the findings impact clinical decisions or patient outcomes would strengthen the\nabstract.\nIntroduction;\nThe introduction effectively contextualizes the study within the field of breast surgery and ADM\nuse. However, it can be improved by:\nIncluding a broader range of studies on ADM use in breast surgery and its alternatives would\nprovide a more comprehensive background.\nClearly articulating the gaps in current research that this study addresses, especially the lack of\nquantitative data on ADM volume retention over time.\nMethods\nThe methodology is well-described, but there are areas that require additional details:\nThe criteria for including patients need more detail, including any exclusion criteria and potential\nbiases introduced by the selection process.\nA more thorough description of the CT-based volumetric analysis, including any validation\nof the method and inter-observer reliability assessments, would enhance the robustness of the\nfindings.\nJustify the choice of statistical tests used and discuss any adjustments made for potential\nconfounding factors, such as differences in patient demographics or treatment modalities (e.g.,\nradiotherapy).\nResults\nThe results section presents comprehensive data but could be further refined:\nA deeper analysis of the complications, including a comparison with rates from other studies,\nwould provide context and highlight the safety profile of ADM use.\nIncluding analyses based on different patient characteristics (e.g., age, tumor location, adjuvant\ntherapy) could provide more nuanced insights.\nClearly stating the clinical significance of the findings, beyond statistical significance, would\nhelp readers understand the practical implications.\nDiscussion\nThe discussion provides a reasonable interpretation of the results but would benefit from:\nA more detailed comparison with similar studies, especially regarding ADM volume retention\nand cosmetic outcomes, would help situate the study's findings within the broader research\nlandscape.\nDiscussing specific clinical recommendations based on the findings, such as patient selection\ncriteria for ADM use, would be valuable for practitioners.\nWhile the study's limitations are acknowledged, a more detailed discussion on potential biases,\nthe impact of the single-center design, and areas for future research (e.g., long-term outcomes)\nwould strengthen the manuscript.\nConclusion\nThe conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings but should:\nClearly state how the findings can influence clinical practice, particularly in terms of improving\ncosmetic outcomes and patient satisfaction.\nPropose specific areas for future studies, such as exploring alternative materials or techniques\nfor ADM placement and longer follow-up periods to assess long-term outcomes.\nTables\nTable 1: Characteristics of Included Patients\nConsider adding a footnote to clarify the method used for calculating specimen volume and\nweight, as this might influence the interpretation of the data.\nEnsure that the formatting is consistent, especially in how ranges are presented (e.g., consistently\nusing parentheses).\nTable 2: Biopsy on Subsequent Follow-Up Examination\nConsider specifying whether the imaging modalities used were consistent across all patients, or\nif there were variations depending on the clinical scenario.\nAdding a summary statistic, such as the percentage of patients with benign vs. malignant\nfindings, would provide a quick reference for readers.\nGeneral Recommendations for All Tables\nUniform Formatting:\nEnsure that all tables use a consistent style, including font size, heading format, and the\npresentation of numerical data.\nStatistical Information:\nWhere applicable, include p-values or other statistical measures to indicate the significance of\ndifferences or findings.\nFootnotes and Abbreviations:\nAlways define abbreviations and include explanatory notes for any complex terms or\nclassifications used in the tables.\nConsistency with Text:\nEnsure that the data presented in the tables is consistent with the descriptions and interpretations\nprovided in the main text of the manuscript.\nReferences\nSome entries might lack complete information, such as issue numbers for journals. For instance:\nReference 3: \"Kim SY, Ph D. Comparison of wound closure using ADM with primary wound\nclosure after BCS in breast cancer patients. J Breast Dis. 2022;10:12-7.\" It's unclear if \"Ph D\"\nis part of the author name or a designation; it should be consistent with the rest of the author\nlist. Additionally, ensure that all elements like volume, issue, and page numbers are present and\ncorrect.\nEnsure that DOIs are included where available, as they provide a direct link to the sources.\nVerify each reference against the original publication to ensure all details (authors, titles, journal\nname, volume, issue, pages) are accurate. For instance:\nReference 10: \"An J, Kwon H, Lim W, Moon BI, Paik NS. The comparison of breast\nreconstruction using two types of acellular dermal matrix after breast-conserving surgery. J Clin\nMed. 2021;10:3430.\" Ensure that the volume number and page range are accurate and that the\ncorrect article title is used.\nEnsure that all journal names are consistently abbreviated or written in full and are italicized if\nrequired by the citation style.\nFor example, some references have \"J Breast Cancer\" while others use full titles. Choose one\nformat and apply it uniformly.\nFor references with multiple authors, list the first six followed by \"et al.\" if there are more than\nsix authors, unless the journal's citation style requires listing all authors.\nOverall Recommendations for Revision\nEnhance the Abstract and Introduction: Include more specific details and context to better frame\nthe study's significance.\nClarify and Expand Methodological Details: Provide comprehensive information on patient\nselection, ADM measurement techniques, and statistical analysis.\nProvide Detailed Results and Discussion: Offer a more in-depth analysis of the results and their\nimplications, including a thorough comparison with existing literature and detailed discussion\nof limitations.\nAcknowledge Limitations and Suggest Future Research: Address potential biases and propose\ndirections for future studies.\nRecommendation",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02821-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 3 Date: 28 Sep 2024
Reviewer: Alberto Rancati
Reviewer's report:
Exciting report, Congratulations to the authors.
just two observations: integration of the ADM into the tissue and why volume change of the
ADM
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 3 Date: 28 Sep 2024
Reviewer: Alberto Rancati
Reviewer's report:
Exciting report, Congratulations to the authors.
just two observations: integration of the ADM into the tissue and why volume change of the
ADM
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2821_ReviewerReport_V3_R5.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 1,
"praise": 1,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0,
"total": 2
}
|
{
"criticism": 0,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.5,
"praise": 0.5,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0
}
| 1
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement\nafter Breast-Conserving Surgery\nVersion: 3 Date: 28 Sep 2024\nReviewer: Alberto Rancati\nReviewer's report:\nExciting report, Congratulations to the authors.\njust two observations: integration of the ADM into the tissue and why volume change of the\nADM",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
||
0
| 0
|
Review for 10.1186/s12893-025-02821-z
|
Reviewed - bmc_surgery
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 4 Date: 18 Nov 2024
Reviewer: Hyukjai Shin
Reviewer's report:
After breast conservation surgery using sheet-shaped ADM, the degree of volume reduction after
radiation therapy was measured using CT, and this is a clinically important paper that presents
follow-up results on the impact of ADM on diagnosing local recurrence. It's worth it.
However, it requires some proofreading before it can be published.
"ADM was inserted after BCS for patients who were likely to develop a deformity of the breast
contour after BCS, according to the surgeon’s judgment. Regardless of tumor size and location,
patients who underwent insertion of a 5×7-cm sheet-type ADM were included in the study." The
above is a very subjective judgment. Objective indications are needed.
1. An explanation of the indications for applying artificial dermis after breast conservation
surgery is needed.
2. Please add photos of the artificial dermis insertion surgery and photos after the surgery.
Especially in cases of local recurrence, ultrasonography and MRI images of the lesion are very
helpful.
|
Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement
after Breast-Conserving Surgery
Version: 4 Date: 18 Nov 2024
Reviewer: Hyukjai Shin
Reviewer's report:
After breast conservation surgery using sheet-shaped ADM, the degree of volume reduction after
radiation therapy was measured using CT, and this is a clinically important paper that presents
follow-up results on the impact of ADM on diagnosing local recurrence. It's worth it.
However, it requires some proofreading before it can be published.
"ADM was inserted after BCS for patients who were likely to develop a deformity of the breast
contour after BCS, according to the surgeon’s judgment. Regardless of tumor size and location,
patients who underwent insertion of a 5×7-cm sheet-type ADM were included in the study." The
above is a very subjective judgment. Objective indications are needed.
1. An explanation of the indications for applying artificial dermis after breast conservation
surgery is needed.
2. Please add photos of the artificial dermis insertion surgery and photos after the surgery.
Especially in cases of local recurrence, ultrasonography and MRI images of the lesion are very
helpful.
|
BMC
|
12893_2025_2821_ReviewerReport_V4_R1.pdf
|
{
"criticism": 1,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 5,
"praise": 2,
"presentation_and_reporting": 2,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 4,
"total": 12
}
|
{
"criticism": 0.08333333333333333,
"example": 0,
"importance_and_relevance": 0,
"materials_and_methods": 0.4166666666666667,
"praise": 0.16666666666666666,
"presentation_and_reporting": 0.16666666666666666,
"results_and_discussion": 0,
"suggestion_and_solution": 0.3333333333333333
}
| 1.166667
| 0
|
[
{
"content": "Please review this paper.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Title: Clinical Progression Following Acellular Dermal Matrix Use for Volume Replacement\nafter Breast-Conserving Surgery\nVersion: 4 Date: 18 Nov 2024\nReviewer: Hyukjai Shin\nReviewer's report:\nAfter breast conservation surgery using sheet-shaped ADM, the degree of volume reduction after\nradiation therapy was measured using CT, and this is a clinically important paper that presents\nfollow-up results on the impact of ADM on diagnosing local recurrence. It's worth it.\nHowever, it requires some proofreading before it can be published.\n\"ADM was inserted after BCS for patients who were likely to develop a deformity of the breast\ncontour after BCS, according to the surgeon’s judgment. Regardless of tumor size and location,\npatients who underwent insertion of a 5×7-cm sheet-type ADM were included in the study.\" The\nabove is a very subjective judgment. Objective indications are needed.\n1. An explanation of the indications for applying artificial dermis after breast conservation\nsurgery is needed.\n2. Please add photos of the artificial dermis insertion surgery and photos after the surgery.\nEspecially in cases of local recurrence, ultrasonography and MRI images of the lesion are very\nhelpful.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 2,025
|
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
BMC Surgery Peer Reviews
This dataset contains peer reviews from BMC, standardized to match the format of the pawin205/PeerRT dataset.
Dataset Structure
Each record contains the following attributes:
relative_rank: Default value (0).win_prob: Default value (0.0).title: Title of the paper.abstract: Abstract of the paper.full_text: Full text of the paper (or review text if unavailable).review: The peer review text.source: Source of the data ('BMC').review_src: Original filename of the review.criteria_count: Dictionary containing counts of specific criteria in the review (e.g., criticism, praise).dimension_scores: Dictionary containing scores for various dimensions.overall_score: Computed overall score (reward value).thinking_trace: Placeholder (empty).prompt: Placeholder (empty).prompt_length: Placeholder (0).conversations: List of dictionaries representing the conversation (User/Assistant format).year: Year of publication (if available).
Usage
from datasets import load_dataset
dataset = load_dataset("JerMa88/BMC_Surgery_Peer_Reviews")
print(dataset['train'][0])
- Downloads last month
- 27