Next Article in Journal
Erratum: Radu, M.-C., et al. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Quality of Educational Process: A Student Survey. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770
Next Article in Special Issue
Perceived Coercion of Persons with Mental Illness Living in a Community
Previous Article in Journal
Health Status, Behaviors, and Beliefs of Health Sciences Students and Staff at Kuwait University: Toward Maximizing the Health of Future Health Professionals and Their Patients
Previous Article in Special Issue
Healthcare Professionals’ and Users’ Experiences of Intersectoral Care between Hospital and Community Mental Healthcare
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Recovery-Oriented Intersectoral Care in Mental Health: As Perceived by Healthcare Professionals and Users

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(23), 8777; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238777
by Kim Jørgensen 1,*, Tonie Rasmussen 2, Morten Hansen 3, Kate Andreasson 1 and Bengt Karlsson 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(23), 8777; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238777
Submission received: 8 September 2020 / Revised: 15 October 2020 / Accepted: 11 November 2020 / Published: 26 November 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Many thanks for the constructive comments.

We have reviewed the article and corrected it linguistically and sent it for English editing.

We have deleted over half of the self-citations and hope it can now be accepted.

Best regards 

The authors 

Reviewer 2 Report

Jørgensen et al. has explored how the mental health professionals and users perceive recovery-oriented intersectoral care between mental health hospitals and community mental health care. The topic has been already extensively explored in the literature.  Results section requires a substantial revision. There is lack of any numerical data, statistics, the authors simply  cite the participant’s statements. Unscientific terms like: “some participants”, “the majority of participants” are used multiple times. I suggest to re- design survey with punctation for the answers and try to use even basic statistical methods in comparison between groups. The increase of sample size would be  useful. Language needs some improvement. The number of self-citations (9/40) is of concern as well.

Author Response

Dar reviewer

Many thanks for the constructive comments.

We have reviewed our analysis and followed your recommendations in adding the number of participants to be more accurate.

We have deleted over half of the self-citations and hope it can now be accepted.

We have rewritten the article and corrected it linguistically and sent it for English editing.

 

Best regards

The authors 

Back to TopTop