<p>This is a fair attempt.</p><p>The method section failed to imply that a matched case-control study design was done, although it clearly defined the confirmed and suspected cases, but with no description of controls and what characteristics they were matched with.</p><p><strong>''Drinking untreated/unsafe Pond water were 9 times more likely to </strong>develop<strong> AWD/Cholera than those who didn’t drink Drinking untreated/unsafe Pond water'' - </strong>This concluding part of the result section could be better presented by stating the odds ratio together with the confidence interval or P value (e.g &nbsp;Odds Ratio= 9 Confidence Interval 7-10), to understand if &nbsp;this finding of an association is by chance or real</p><p>The significant finding of this outbreak investigation was not synthesized into the conclusion and recommendation. i.e. <strong>''Drinking untreated/unsafe Pond water were 9 times more likely to </strong>develop<strong> AWD/Cholera than those who didn’t drink Drinking untreated/unsafe Pond water''. </strong>The conclusion and recommendation are totally off and not addressing the major finding of the outbreak investigation.</p>