Next Article in Journal
Functional Dentition, Chronic Periodontal Disease and Frailty in Older Adults—A Narrative Review
Previous Article in Journal
Nutrients and Environmental Factors Cross Wavelet Analysis of River Yi in East China: A Multi-Scale Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Association of Received Intergenerational Support with Subjective Well-Being among Elderly: The Mediating Role of Optimism and Sex Differences
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 1
10.3390/ijerph20010498
Review Report
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of Mild Cognitive Impairment Questionnaire among Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(1), 498; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010498
by Qingmin Dai 1, Hong Su 2, Zanhua Zhou 3, Caifu Li 3, Jihua Zou 3, Ying Zhou 3, Rhayun Song 4, Yang Liu 2, Lijuan Xu 3,* and Yuqiu Zhou 2,*
Reviewer 2:
Guilherme Furtado
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(1), 498; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010498
Submission received: 26 November 2022 / Revised: 24 December 2022 / Accepted: 26 December 2022 / Published: 28 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Influence of Psychosocial Factors in Healthy Aging)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Introduction: I suggest to write the complete name of the WHOQOL-OLD the first time that it's mentioned, to facilitate the understanding of the acronym by the reader.

 Line 192: The definition of "frailty status" should be briefly explained here.

Metodology: It's important to include a paragraph describing how the researchers treated missing and atypical data.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors present a validation study for the assessment of cognitive impairment, fulfilling the necessary assumptions to complete the work. However, I leave below some questions to be clarified.

1. title: appropriate 

2. Abstract: Contains necessary information for this type of study

3. Introduction: Consistent, objective and rational

4. Methods: Please improve your method by putting the following elements into sections, separate subsections: Study design; Participants and settings; Sample selection (inclusion and exclusion criteria; Sample size: (if you did not calculate the sample, explain why a sample of 186 individuals selected by convenience is considered sufficient for validating the instrument, taking into account the size of the population in China).

5. Results: I think it would be interesting to show the characterization data of the sample according to gender; I believe that the correlation is an assumption of the AFC, therefore, these data must be presented before the figure of the AFC. However, if I'm wrong, please correct me as my reference sources don't make this clear.

6. Discussion: Organized, excellent level of presentation of sections and subsections.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

congratulations on the article and its structure. In order to improve it further, I recommend that you strengthen the introduction a bit more and add some analysis in relation to discriminant validity. 

Otherwise, I believe the manuscript is a suitable paper for this special issue and of high impact for the scientific community. Please also add as much information as possible regarding the ethical collection of data. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Back to TopTop