关于小世界网络文章reviewer的返回意见，严老师和臧老师能否帮我分析一下，万分感谢

- "Certainly the data presented does not allow the conclusion that PHN was associated with more impairment to short range connections than the long-range connections. There are at least two reasons for this:
o A. Significant effect on local efficiency combined with non-significant effect on global efficiency does not mean that effect on the local efficiency would be significantly different from the effect of global efficiency. However, it is easy to verify whether the effects are significantly different and this is what the paper should report (in addition to the statistical tests presently reported).
o B. The test above still concerns global efficiency and local efficiency with only indirect linkage to short and long range connections. However, also the effects of PHN pain to short and long range connections could be tested by correlating the connection length and the strength of the connection (correlation coefficient in the correlation matrix that is thresholded to create a network) in HCs versus PHNs. I am not an expert enough on PHN to recommend if such a test if useful or not, but to claim something along these lines, a proper test is required. "

The point in A was not optional, it is mandatory. I am sorry for not communicating this clearly enough. A significant effect on local efficiency and a not significant effect on global efficiency does not permit to make any claims about the difference between the two types of efficiency but these differences should be tested with a separate (paired) test. Of course, when dealing with different quantities (global and local efficiency), a specific care must be taken that this test is valid (i.e. report the standard deviations also).