Mechanisms of Food-Induced Symptom Induction and Dietary Management in Functional Dyspepsia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a very appreciable paper, fully describing any aspect of functional dyspepsia. I have appreciated the attention in the description of food-induced mechanisms of functional dyspepsia, even if some information is repeated a little too many times between paragraphs.

I want to report some notifications:

-Title: since the aim of the Paper is to ‘..collate the possible mechanisms for eating-induced and food-related symptoms and use the available evidence to develop and present a staged process for dietary management of FD’ the Authors could hypothesize to modify the title in order to introduce also the concept of describing the mechanism for eating and food-induced symptoms of FD.

-The Paper presents too many acronyms making hard the text comprehension. Please avoid some acronyms presented only a few times, such as SI, SCD, MAM

-The References style should be modified according to the journal (see Author’s Guidelines)

-Section number 1‘Introduction’ has an additional initial point

-In the ‘Introduction’ section, when explaining differential diagnosis with possible diseases associated with dyspepsia (lines 31-32), the Authors should include also atrophic gastritis.  

-In Lines 384-385 Authors refer to Table 1 and Figure 1 not presented in the paper. Tables and Figures should be added in the template in order to evaluate them.

-Title of section number 7 should be modified since there are too many ‘and’; a comma is suggested instead of the first ‘and’.

-In section number 9 the expert opinion paragraphs start. This should be clearly stated in the section’s title, in addition to the text.

Moreover, in the same section, the sub-paragraphs are not well defined since the titles are not evidenced and numbered (line 820, line 847, line 887, line 917, line 937, line 953, line 966). Please modify.

 

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor, I would like to thank you for giving the opportunity to review the manuscript by Duncanson et al. Authors are to be commended for putting together a concise and well-written manuscript on a very interesting yet underrated topic. I would only suggest some minor trimming of the Introduction section since it is way too long containing many redundant information.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for your modifications.