Next Article in Journal
Aiding the Diagnosis of Diabetic and Hypertensive Retinopathy Using Artificial Intelligence-Based Semantic Segmentation
Previous Article in Journal
Colistin Heteroresistance in Klebsiella Pneumoniae Isolates and Diverse Mutations of PmrAB and PhoPQ in Resistant Subpopulations
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Low Alanine Aminotransferase Cut-Off for Predicting Liver Outcomes; A Nationwide Population-Based Longitudinal Cohort Study

J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(9), 1445; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091445
by Jin Hwa Park 1,†, Jun Choi 2,†, Dae Won Jun 1,*,‡, Sung Won Han 2,*,‡, Yee Hui Yeo 3 and Mindie H. Nguyen 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(9), 1445; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091445
Submission received: 6 August 2019 / Revised: 29 August 2019 / Accepted: 9 September 2019 / Published: 11 September 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Gastroenterology & Hepatopancreatobiliary Medicine)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Line 77 to 80: This section is without punctuation mark. I suggest you edit this section to make it shorter so its easier to understand. Also what is liver related unfavorable outcomes? Perhaps a few examples to make it clear on what you are aiming to investigate. 

Line 85: In South Korea, 

Line 85 to 93: Is this necessary when you are only using 1 set of database?

Line 94 to 96: lacking punctuation marks.

Line 96: typo.'who had"

Line 98, punctuation mistake

Line 127: typo, IN

I find figure 3 confusing, it does not look like a Kaplan-Meier cureves, perhaphs not the most appropriate with dash line. possible to have different colour? Also having this results in a table form is probably more meaningful. At present I do not think a non stats expert would be able to draw conclusion from the figure. 

Discussion

Line 17: typo. 

Line 35,39: referencing error

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

One of the biggest concern I have with this paper is lack of reference. It is very difficult to cross check their claims. Because there is no reference. 

 

In introduction, if there is any data that should be supported by reference. Good amount of revision should be there in introduction.

 

Author Response

One of the biggest concern I have with this paper is lack of reference. It is very difficult to cross check their claims. Because there is no references.

In introduction, if there is any data that should be supported by reference. Good amount of revision should be there in introduction.

☞ Thank you for your comments. The reference part seems to be missing when updating the data. We are sorry to have confused you because of our mistake. As pointed out, we have added references and data to support the content of the introduction and discussion.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

NA

Back to TopTop