Peer review report
Reviewer: Wei Zhang
Institution: The First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North University, Hebei Province, China.
email: 15369318318@163.com
Section 1 – Serious concerns
- Do you have any serious concerns about the manuscript such as fraud, plagiarism, unethical or unsafe practices? No
- Have authors’ provided the necessary ethics approval (from authors’ institution or an ethics committee)? *Yes
Section 2 – Language quality
- How would you rate the English language quality? High quality
Section 3 – validity and reproducibility
- Does the work cite relevant and sufficient literature? Yes
- Is the study design appropriate and are the methods used valid? Yes
- Are the methods documented and analysis provided so that the study can be replicated? Yes
- Is the source data that underlies the result available so that the study can be replicated? not applicable
- Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes
- Is quality of the figures and tables satisfactory? No
- Are the conclusions adequately supported by the results? not applicable
- Are there any objective errors or fundamental flaws that make the research invalid?
Table 1 - The number of people in the gender section is wrong.
Section 4 – Suggestions
- Based on your answers in section 3 how could the author improve the study?
（1）There is no "conclusion" in the abstract.
（2）In order to make the study group comparable with the control group, should the patients in the control group be CSKP infected patients? Or the control group should at least be patients with bacterial infection.
（3）The font in Table 2 is inconsistent with the original text.
（4）The table format should be "three line table".
（5）The number "0" can be added before some decimal points in Table 2.
（6）The references are generally too old. It is suggested to increase the proportion of references published within 5 years.
（7）It is suggested to write more specific experimental methods for amplifying KPC gene, such as primers, PCR reaction conditions and reaction system of KPC gene.
（8）Have you done the drug sensitivity test of Klebsiella pneumoniae? If so, it is recommended to write the results in the article.
Section 5 – Decision
Verified with reservations: The content is scientifically sound but has shortcomings that could be improved by minor revisions.
