Skip to content

Archives

Cih uib


cih uib

Correspondence: [email protected] 1Centre for International Health, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway. BCPL Bergen Computational Physics Laboratory www.bccs.uib.no/bcpl. - CBU Computational Biology Unit CHI Center for International Health www.cih.uib.no. Institutional Web Address, cih.uib.no. Personal, Twitter Facebook LinkdIn * Edit Form. Nov 15, 2021 * According to Total H. BETA VERSION.

Thematic video

Scientific seminar: From Past to Future in Global Health

Cih uib -

sexanthr sexarch 4 4 --------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 2. 1. 2. or find me on MSN Messenger 2 3

JOURNAL TRANSCRIPT


Author's response to reviews Title: Helicobacter pylori in apparently healthy children aged 0-12 years in urban Kampala, Uganda: a community-based cross sectional survey. Authors: Elin Hestvik ([email protected]) Thorkild Tylleskar ([email protected]) Deogratias H Kaddu-Mulindwa ([email protected]) Grace Ndeezi ([email protected]oo.com) Lena Grahnquist ([email protected]) Edda J Olafsdottir ([email protected]) James K Tumwine ([email protected]) Version: 5 Date: 8 April 2010 Author's response to reviews: see over

Author's response to reviews Title: Helicobacter pylori in apparently healthy children aged 0-12 years in urban Kampala, Uganda: a community-based cross sectional survey. Authors: Elin Hestvik ([email protected]) Thorkild Tylleskar ([email protected]) Deogratias H Kaddu-Mulindwa ([email protected]) Grace Ndeezi ([email protected]) Lena Grahnquist ([email protected]) Edda J Olafsdottir ([email protected]) James K Tumwine ([email protected]) Version: 4 Date: 24 March 2010 Author's response to reviews: see over

UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN

Bergen 23 March 2010

The Editors BMC Gastroenterology

Dear Editors, Re: Submission no 1997903225281122 entitled: “Helicobacter pylori in apparently healthy children aged 0-12 years in urban Kampala, Uganda: cih uib community-based cross sectional survey.” Thank you for the reply with extensive review comments on our manuscript. We have now carefully considered the comments and made changes to the manuscript. The reviewers comments have been commented on the next page of this letter and onwards. We are providing the revised manuscript in two versions, with and without track changes.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely Elin Hestvik

Mailing address: Centre for International Health University of Bergen Årstadveien 21 N-5009 Bergen Norway

Visiting address: Årstadveien 21, 5th floor N-5009 Bergen Norway

Telephone: +47 55588560 Telefax: +47 55588561 E-mail: [email protected] www.cih.uib.no

2

First reviewer's report Title: Helicobacter pylori in apparently healthy children aged 0-12 years in urban Kampala, Uganda: a community-based cross sectional survey. Version: 1 Date: 20 November 2009 Reviewer: Dietrich Rothenbacher Reviewer's report: The paper by Hestvik and colleagues describes the results of a study in children aged 0 to 12 years in an urban area in Uganda in a cross-sectional manner. For specific instruction the authors might also consider the STROBE checklist (www.strobe-statement.org). It gives very concrete guidance how information stemming from observational research should be reported. Some changes have been made to comply with the STROBE check list. In general, the manuscript should be considerably shorted and efforts should be cih uib to report the results of this cross-sectional study more concisely. None of the other reviewers found the manuscript to long, but we have shortened some of it and in special the chapter on HIV testing. We cih uib made changes to report the results more concisely. Specific comments: Background: 1) the references in the introduction are sometime quite historical and the authors might consider using more up-to-date references, maybe even a more recent review article that summarizes the recent knowledge. This way the interested reader is guided towards a better source of more-up-to date information. The review references have been exchanged with more up to date references. 2) Some of the vague information related to time should be specified (i.e. line 12, until recently) to give a clear message. Stool test are available since over 10 years. The same is true for the phrase later down “the new monoclonal HpSA antibody test”. Changes made. 3) It would be advisable to structure the text more clearly in paragraphs and it might be possible to limit it to the information that helps to understand the scientific background of the study. The novelty of the study is that it delivers data from an urban area in Cih uib. Therefore the introduction should rather work towards the gaps that exist from Africa and indicate the knowledge gap this study tries to fill. Some of the information related to test performance is already very special and might better fit into the discussion section. Introduction shortened and more focused. Subjects and methods 1) A flow chart could help to better understand how participants were selected into the study. Provided as figure 1. To me it is unclear why children with HIV and other chronic diseases were excluded from study participation. They are also part of the source population. Cih uib is correct that they are part of the source population. But from other studies we suspected the prevalence in HIV infected children to be different from the rest of the

3

population. Comparing different populations with different Cih uib becomes difficult if HIV is not singled out. 2) The information under the heading “treatment” is already presenting results and should not be displayed in the Methods section. The section has been moved to results. 3) The treatment section seems out of the scope of the paper and not really be related to the specific objectives of the study. From an ethical point of view (also required by the ethical committee) it is important to treat conditions identified in a study. This chapter proves that we followed the Helsinki declaration conducting ethical research. We therefore prefer to keep the section in. 4) The description of the HIV testing is also very detailed and could be shortened considerably. Again, why contra costa shelter in place it used as exclusion criteria and not as a potential risk factor or as a simple comorbidity factor? We have shortened the description of HIV testing. Second comment, see above. See also comment from reviewer Lucia Braga. Results 1) How was the response quote among the approached children? Added. 2) Before describing the prevalence results of the study, the sociodemographic characteristics of the study population should be described (text of 2nd para should come first). Changed What was the min. age? Added It might be of interest to subgroup the one year old in two separate categories or at least report the prevalence in the children aged up cih uib 6 months and between 6 and < 12 months. Done. Results are added and discussed. 3) Then the prevalence figure should be described. I might be useful to provide the point estimates of the age categories (see figure 1) also with a 95 % CI. Done. 4) The numbers related to abdominal pain should be shown. Added in table. Discussion 1) Again organize the text in paragraphs. The key results should be summarized in the first paragraph. (Organize according to STROBE recommendation) Discussion reorganized accordingly. Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests

4

Quality of written English: Acceptable Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the statistics.

5

Second reviewer's report Title: Helicobacter pylori in apparently healthy children aged 0-12 years in urban Kampala, Uganda: a community-based cross sectional survey. Version: 1 Date: 17 February 2010 Reviewer: Lucia Braga Reviewer's report: This study is the first survey describing the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori colonization among children in an urban area in Uganda. This is a simple, well-performed study, it used an accurate methodology to identify H. pylori infection, the authors screened the children for HIV infection and included only HIV negative children, this is a very important issue since several studies have shown that the prevalence of H. pylori in HIV-positive individuals might be lower than the HIV negative ones. I have a few suggestions to improve the paper: -Minor Essential Revisions The paper needs some minor editing to review the grammar and spelling. line 10 and throughout the paper -colonization and not clonisation line 12 recentl,y line 13 Urea 13 breath test should be written as 13Urea breath test line 14 suchas -such as line 40 characterised -characterized line 85 analyse -analize pg 7 line 42 subsidised -subsidized All changes have been made. 1-Introduction Line 13 ´´Until recentl,y technically advanced and time consuming methods, for example the Urea 13 breath test, which is not recommended in children younger than 4 years´´. This information needs be rewritten and add reference. Studies from Brazil showed that the breath test is sensitive and specific for cih uib ages even in one year children (Cardinalli etal 2003). Studies from Egypt, showed that Breath test and the HpStar stool antigen test were highly sensitive and specific noninvasive tests for the diagnosis of H pylori in children (Frenck RW et al 2006). The advantage of the antigen stoos test is the ability to obtain accurate results rapidly without the need for sophisticated laboratory equipment.

6

Cardinali, LCC, Rocha, GA, Rocha, AM et al. Evaluation of C-urea breath test and Helicobacter pylori stool antigen test for diagnosis of H. pylori infection in children from a developing country. J. Clin. Microbiol. J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Jul;41(7):3334-5. Frenck RW Jr, Fathy HM, Sherif M, Mohran Z, El Mohammedy H, Francis W, Rockabrand D, Mounir BI, Rozmajzl P, Frierson HF. Sensitivity and specificity of various tests for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori in Egyptian children Pediatrics. 2006 Oct;118(4):e1195202 Changes are made. We have shortened the introduction but the technicalities are brought up in the discussion. 2-Methods -The authors should mention how the children were selected. Randomly? This has been clarified. Children are selected consecutively by door to door visits until required numbers were reached. -How were the stool samples transported from the field to the lab? At room temperature? at 4ºC ( on ice )? At ambient temperature. It is added in the text. -After describing the H. pylori stool antigen test ( page 7) it is necessary to mention the sensitivity and specificity of the test and to add the reference. Sensitivity and specificity of the test is discussed under “Introduction” with references, percentages are added. 3-Results -It is important to know the number of children in each age group and not only the percentage (1-

Источник: https://elib.tips/edoc/title-helicobacter-pylori-in-apparently-healthy-children-aged-0-12-years-in-urban-kampala-uganda-a-community-based-cross-sectional-survey.html
3.
cih uib
cih uib
cih uib

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *