Next Article in Journal
Remote Learning in Higher Education: Evidence from Poland
Next Article in Special Issue
Personal, Academic Stressors and Environmental Factors Contributing to Musculoskeletal Pain among Undergraduates Due to Online Learning: A Mixed Method Study with Data Integration
Previous Article in Journal
Response of Antibiotic Resistance Genes and Related Microorganisms to Arsenic during Vermicomposting of Cow Dung
Previous Article in Special Issue
Variations in the Course and Diameter of the Suprascapular Nerve: Anatomical Study
 
 
Brief Report
Peer-Review Record

The Effect of Neurodynamic Techniques on the Dispersion of Intraneural Edema: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(21), 14472; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114472
by Sergio Nuñez de Arenas-Arroyo 1, Vicente Martínez-Vizcaíno 1,2,*, Iván Cavero-Redondo 1,2, Celia Álvarez-Bueno 1,3, Sara Reina-Gutierrez 1 and Ana Torres-Costoso 4
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(21), 14472; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114472
Submission received: 13 September 2022 / Revised: 27 October 2022 / Accepted: 1 November 2022 / Published: 4 November 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

ijerph-1940926

 

The effect of neurodynamic techniques on the dispersion of intraneural oedema: A systematic review with meta-analysis

 

This article is straightforward and easy to read. It focuses on a common neurological problem with interest to orthopedic and neurological surgeons, too.

Unfortunately, the number of meta-analyzed studies is rather low.

 

Minor points:

Abstract, line 17: ... we ... searched ... past tense

Major points:

1.    A more detailed comparison of the excluded study [Schmid et al.] in "living" humans compared to your group would have been a most interesting point to discuss. It strenghthens your results concerning the clinical implications.

 

Figures

Figure 1: The legend doubles Figure 1. How can you identify 4 records and exclude 15 ?

Figure 2 is not clearly lisible in the present layout.

 

Table 1: is not cited in the text. The legend is confusing / inadequate. Is there a standard deviation to age / height / weight ?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop