The following should be amended in the paper Introduction: the novelty of the study is still not very clear. There seems to be considerable literature, including RCTs, on this topic. Please motivate why another study is needed. 2. Methods: please be more specific in regards to: -How the population was sampled. Please include a participation flow chart that shows exclusions and declines to participate -How diet was assessed, including the structure of the questionnaire, validation in the population of interest, and more details on how micronutrient intake was calculated -How the different MS components were quantified? Please also address why a combined MS score was no used. -How the authors approached the issue of confounding and why confounders were not included in the regression models. -Why the choice was made to dichotomize the exposure. Nutrient-outcome associations can be quite complex and of varying shapes; it would be important to capture this. If not, an adequate reason need to be given for dichotomizing. -Please consider to account for multiple testing given the number of outcomes (and exposures). 3. Results: -Please present table 1 split on the exposure, comparing the two exposure groups -Please add P-values to table 2 comparing dietary recall to FFQ -Please present multivariable OR (95% CI) 4. Discussion: a through discussion is needed of the results in the context of prior literature which is currently missing. Please discuss the limitations brought up by the reviewers: low statistical power, limited dietary assessment, and confounding, including what influence these may have of the results (e.g. direction and strengths of associations). Please address the possibility that these may be chance findings due to multiple testing and that the results may be affected by reverse causation. 5. Conclusion: the last sentence is not supported by the findings of this study; please revise. 6. Language and syntax: the text is quite difficult to follow in places and would benefit from a proof-reading by a proficient English writer. Please also remove references to causal language; this study was not situated to evaluate cause and effect. Please check you use of scientific terminology, e.g. tables 4 and 5 are not technically evaluating ‘associations’.
Hide
Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]