The Role of Metabolomics and Microbiology in Urinary Tract Infection

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors presented a Review document entitled "The Role of Metabolomics and Microbiology in Urinary Tract Infection", the hace recovered a huge amount of interesting data on the field of diagnostic microbiology.

I Have some suggestions:

L78. "et al" must be with period at the end "et al" -> "et al.", please revise the entire document.

L93. Citation must be before the period "age. [26]" -> "age [26]."

L120, L174-L176, L186-187, 233-234, 240-241. Please rephrase the sentence to make it clear, in general the entire document must be verified by a native English speaker.

L125 and L129. Please change the parenthesis sign before de period.

L150, L371, etc. All the abbreviations used in the document must be clarified when are used for the first time (rUTI, IBC, SCF, LCF).

L174. Erase the period before Enterococcus.

L176-177, 357 please erase the period after de "sp" or "spp", those words should not be with period unless are at the end of a sentence.

Table 1. Please turn the table into an adequate format trying to fit the species name in the cell, please shift the bacteria names in italicized shape. Pleas change "Escherlchla" for "Escherichia".

L247. Nuclear Magnetic Resolution? or Nuclear Magnetic Resonance?

L281. When you are mentioning genes names, it must be italicized.

L427, 273, 300, 311, 348, etc. Please verify the entire document, there are several issues regarding the bacteria names, they must be italicized.

L312. Please shift Pr. mirabilis to P. mirabilis

 L320. Please shit "3hydroxypropanaldehyde" to "3-hidroxypropanaldehyde"

The document require an exhaustive revision by a a native English speaker

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I have read with interest the manuscript submitted by the authors since this topic represents a great concern worldwide.

I have a few comments to be addressed in order to improve the quality of the manuscript:

preventive treatment - if we talk about treatment, it is not prevention

many phrases are too long, making them hard to understand.

once described an abbreviation, such as UTI - only the abbreviated form should be used

row 62 - this information is not new at all..

row 85 - Gardnerella follows closely in terms of abundance. However, fig 1 states differently.

Fig 1 - all abbreviated terms should be described. 

row 108 - false-positive diagnosis - maybe false-negative

many abbreviations are not described at all, such as: WGS, UPEC, rUTI, TCA, IBCs and many more

Moustafa et al [30], 116 samples were successfully analysed by 16S rDNA sequencing and grouped according to clinical laboratory clusters - please rephrase

Bacterial names are miswritten all over the manuscript;

Fig 2, even though visually looks good, has a low resolution and the text is very hard to understand

rows 355-357 - please rephrase

it is not indicated to start a phrase with the word "and"

The conclusions of the study should be clearly presented.

Overall, the study seems to be disorganized, containing a great amount of information but not presented clearly.

many misspells, and punctuation misuse.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All suggestions have been properly addressed and the manuscript has been considerably improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I appreciate the author's efforts in addressing my comments. The quality of the manuscript has increased. Only some minor changes are still required:

Moustafa et al. [30], 116 samples were successfully analysed by 16S rDNA sequencing, found that abnormal proliferation of microbiota such as Aspergillus and E. coli was found in the patients - Moustafa et al. [30] successfully analyzed 116 samples by 16S rDNA sequencing and found that ....

Clostridium -> Clostridioides

Please add a single phrase/paragraph at the end with the most important findings of your research.

For future publications - I highly recommend the authors use the track changes feature to show the exact manner in which the manuscript has been revised. 

Best regards,

minor

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx