De Luca L, Di Berardino M, Mangiavillano B, Repici A. Gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in Western countries: Indications, applications, efficacy and training perspective. World J Gastrointest Surg 2021; 13(10): 1180-1189 [PMID: 34754386 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v13.i10.1180]
Reader's ID:
03765445
Submitted on:
November 02, 2021, 07:15
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:
I enjoyed reading your article with great interest, particularly from the training perspective. I completed my surgical and endoscopic training in Ireland about decade ago with little opportunity to perform ESD or EMR. I supplemented my own training with hands-on EMR and ESD workshops in France, Portugal, Singapore, and Taiwan. I am glad to hear timely progress has been made with ESGE having developed a European core curriculum for ESD practice across Europe with the aim of high-quality ESD training. Due to its uniquely located esophageal or gastric lesion with different histology, morphology and sizes, every case of EMR or ESD is different and serves as an opportunity for gaining more valuable experience. Not only should we train our trainees and ourselves, but we should also train our endoscopy support staff in handling these therapeutic endoscopic instruments.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
Thank you very much for your comments.