DfMA for a Better Industrialised Building System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The introduction is the synthesis of the whole work. Therefore the author must present briefly the main results, thus emphasizing his contribution. The introduction must specify the objectives of the study and identifies  the research gap  and thus the scope of research .The Introduction must present in a more comprehensive context, the problems arise and the expected results.

In the case of this paper, the authors divided the introduction into 2 sections. None of these sections meet the requirements presented above. In the first section, the justification for the research problem is weak.

Sentences without subject and predicate are used -line 28, or terms that have not been explained -line 31

Section 1.1 does not play a role in the introduction because it presents the conceptualization of the term used in the paper. A new section must be introduced.

Section 2 Methods do not explain exactly what bibliometrical methods are used, but only very vaguely

Section 3 has a colloquial style of expression, which is not allowed in scientific papers (Analysis of research keywords can give a general idea what is the area that researchers 131 have touched on in their research on a certain research topic... Looking at Figure 2.... In Figure 2, we can see that research.....

Figure 2,3 is of low quality

Section 3.4 The Enabler – only, cannot be a title of a section

BIM is suddenly introduced without any linkage between lines 21-242

In general, this section, 3.4, is poorly presented, fragmented, and does not meet the requirements of a research paper, mixing the notions, without emphasizing the role and importance of addressing this topic.

Section 4.1.1 The research gap and future potential future research topic are elaborated as follows:

-The title is misspelled

-A title cannot contain   :

The conclusions do not demonstrate the added value of the paper, nor the contributions of the authors, nor the theoretical and practical implications of the research.

Author Response

Thank you for taking your time to make the review. Please see the attachment for our response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the interesting Manuscript ID buildings-1730408. The review Manuscript presented good quality of research in highlighting, the hypothesis, methodological statement. The selected problem of the topic DfMA for a better Industrialized Building System is interesting.  Several comments regarding the improvement of the manuscript are following:

1. In the review manuscript the focus on industry sectors can by more indicated.

2. The Figure 2 (page 5 line 147-149) is not readable, informative and acceptable for the publication. Please authors find the more informative way to show the science mapping of research keywords.

3.  In The Figure 3 (page 6, line 155)) presented countries involved in research can by better presented as list or Table. The number of participants of each countries can by indicated. The Figure 3 (page 6, line 155) is not readable, informative and acceptable for the publication. 

4. In the conclusion part the main highlighting of the review must be presented.

5. In the Review manuscript literature analysis from the selected problem of the topic with a new literature source (2022 year) can be presented. The literature review and reference list can be improved.

6. Literature reference is presented without the requirements of the journal. It must by corrected.

7. The algorithm of the review analysis can by shown as developed schema and presented as Figure. 

Reviewer

Author Response

Thank you for your review. Please see the attachment for our response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors have addressed all recommendations made

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors 

Thank you for the corrections in the presented manuscript.

Reviewer