Review of 'Manifestation of Guillain-Barre Syndrome After Infection with SARS-CoV-2 versus Other Prior Infections : a Meta-Analysis and Severity Assessment'

Reviewer: MORUFU OLALEKAN RAIMI

Inviter role(s): AUTHOR

Publication date of review: 2023-12-17

Bookmark

MORUFU OLALEKAN RAIMI3

Manifestation of Guillain-Barre Syndrome After Infection with SARS-CoV-2 versus Other Prior Infections : a Meta-Analysis and Severity AssessmentCrossref ScienceOpen

The decision is: ACCEPTED after moderate revision

Average rating:	    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of importance:	    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of validity:	    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of completeness:	    Rated 3 of 5.
Level of comprehensibility:	    Rated 3 of 5.
Competing interests:	None

Reviewed article

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Manifestation of Guillain-Barre Syndrome After Infection with SARS-CoV-2 versus Other Prior Infections : a Meta-Analysis and Severity Assessment

Katherine Bockholt, Sarah Betts, Barbara M. Calhoun (2023)

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is a rare, autoimmune disease generally triggered by an abnormal immune response to a viral or bacterial infection. Typically, this aberrant immune response targets the nerves, leading to poor nerve signal conduction and damage and manifesting in a variety of physical symptoms. These physical symptoms range from muscle weakness to full paralysis; this intense variability of GBS is not well understood nor comprehensively classified. Our first objective was to provide a better classification method for GBS symptom presentation, and here we present the most specific symptom dependent GBS outcomes severity scale to date. Additionally, the rise of COVID-19 caused an increase in patients who developed GBS after infection with SARS-CoV-2. We applied our novel scoring assessment to 109 total cases of GBS, either induced after SARS-CoV-2 infection or not, to determine if the severity level of the disease manifestation depended on SARS-CoV-2. The results from this analysis show there is no significant difference between the severity of GBS for patients with GBS associated with COVID-19 and GBS without COVID-19 association.

1 comments Cited 0 times     Rated -3 of 5. – based on 3 reviews

(Latest)

Bookmark

Review information

DOI:: 10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-MED.AJJNBU.v1.REMSCC

License:

This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com.

ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine,Infectious disease & Microbiology

Keywords: GBS,Symptoms,Guillain-Barre Syndrome,Clinical Outcomes Scores,Outcomes,COVID-19,SARS-CoV-2,Covid,Guillain-Barre

Review text

ScienceOpen.com

My Overall Evaluation

RAIMI Morufu Olalekan (Review Comment 17/12/2023)

The decision is: ACCEPTED after moderate revision

Reviewer #: The manuscript entitle "Manifestation of Gulltain-Barre Syndrome After Infection with SARS-COV-2 versus other prior infections: A Meta-Analysis and Severity Assessment" needs moderate revision before publishing: This research aims to create a space to generate dialogue important in shaping and responding to the manifestation of Gulltain-Barre Syndrome after Infection with SARS-COV-2 versus other prior infections. The manuscript offers a very interesting and important theme, for global agendas. The abstracts of the papers however, vary in the level of detail they each provide regarding their focus, methods and aims.

The abstract need to be improved to accurately reflect the content. Abstract should lay out five key points:

Rationale (1-2 sentences) - why was the research needed?

Objective (1 sentence)- what were you trying to provide to meet that need?

Method(s) (up to 3 sentences) - briefly summarize what and which parameters were measured.

Results (up to 4-5 sentences)- what did you find? Please add some data to demonstrate the findings.

Conclusions/Recommendations (1 sentence) - so what should be done with or in response to your findings?

Avoid using keywords that already there are in the title.
The authors mention the relevant and recent related studies to give information to readers about the current knowledge. The introduction appears to follow a logical progression, Introduction is properly harmonized with the study rationale. The authors explain more about the novelty of manuscript in introduction section. The manuscript is quite innovative. This is impressive.
The aim of the study and justification is clearly defined.
I enjoyed reading this paper and I was impressed by the protocol base that the authors are using. I am personally very interested in the Gulltain Barre Syndrome manifestation after SARS-COV-2 infection and I think this are important and relevant to the study protocol. I also appreciated the rigor with which the authors are approaching their protocol and analyses. Well done!
The tables in the text substantiate your protocol claim. However, it need to be labelled appropriately.
There were few numbers of grammatical issues throughout the paper, which made the ideas unclear at times. I recommend that the authors proofread the paper carefully, and/or enlist some colleagues/friendly reviewers to help them identify and correct grammatical problems.
Authors should use transitional words mindfully to highlight clear and thoughtful connections among ideas.
Make sure that all the tables are quoted in the text and in correct order, too.
Methodologies used in the manuscript should be describe clearly and in details. Please check the accuracy of this section. Your Methodology should provide context to the research you are presenting and investigating, but the research methodology is not presented sufficiently.
Details of Statistical analysis are missing.
Discussion section need to be improved: Describe the major findings of your study in the opening sentence. Correlation of your results with previous literature is essential. So, discuss your own results so far before relating them to the results of other published work. Then correlate your work with at least 7-8 recent publications either in support or in contradiction for justification of results.
Use your protocol to expand reader understanding why each of these variables matter and its implication.
Conclusion is absent - Add the specific value, problems and challenges of the findings in the conclusion.
Add 2-3 lines about future recommendation or implications of research in last portion.
Each citation and reference need careful checking for accuracy of comment in the text. This is a very important and basic point in writing scientific papers; if the paper does not say what the authors are saying then it MUST NOT be cited in the text.
There is enough new content in this paper to distinguish it from other works.
The submission provides enough new material for journal publication. This suggestion would strengthen the study further and when addressed will improve the manuscript.