Gadour E, Miutescu B, Okasha HH, Ghiuchici AM, AlQahtani MS. Diagnostic yield of video capsule endoscopy vs simple balloon enteroscopy in small intestinal disorders: A systematic review. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2025; 17(7): 108264 [PMID: 40677578 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i7.108264]
Reader's ID:
08628847
Submitted on:
July 14, 2025, 07:21
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
This paper provides valuable insights into the complementary roles of VCE and SBE in diagnosing small bowel disorders. By comparing both techniques, the study highlights VCE’s superiority for non-invasive initial evaluations and SBE’s utility in therapeutic interventions and obtaining histopathological confirmation. The findings are clinically significant, especially in managing obscure gastrointestinal bleeding and small bowel tumors, offering a more structured approach for clinicians. However, the study could benefit from a discussion on emerging technologies and larger, prospective studies to further validate its findings. Overall, this paper is a useful reference for clinicians involved in small bowel diagnostics.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
Thank you very much for your comments.