Next Article in Journal
The Burnout of Nurses in Intensive Care Units and the Impact of the Pandemic of SARS-CoV-2: Protocol of a Scoping Review
Next Article in Special Issue
COVID-19 Infection among Nursing Students in Spain: The Risk Perception, Perceived Risk Factors, Coping Style, Preventive Knowledge of the Disease and Sense of Coherence as Psychological Predictor Variables: A Cross Sectional Survey
Previous Article in Journal
Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Japanese Version of Newly Graduated Nurses’ Difficulties with End-of-Life Care for Cancer Patients (NDEC Scale)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Changes in Clinical Training for Nursing Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review Protocol
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nursing Reports
Volume 12
Issue 3
10.3390/nursrep12030064
Review Report
nursrep-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....
share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Examining Healthcare Professionals’ Telehealth Usability before and during COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Nurs. Rep. 2022, 12(3), 648-654; https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep12030064
by Mohammed Gh. Alzahrani 1, Nazik M. A. Zakari 2, Dina I. Abuabah 2, Mona S. Ousman 2, Jing Xu 3 and Hanadi Y. Hamadi 3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Stefan Hertling
Nurs. Rep. 2022, 12(3), 648-654; https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep12030064
Submission received: 23 July 2022 / Revised: 23 August 2022 / Accepted: 30 August 2022 / Published: 3 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nursing and COVID-19 â…   )

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attachment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you, a point-by-point response is attached for Reviewer 1

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Abstract is very short. The main findings should be better presented and the language of this section should be revised.

 

Introduction:

partial repetitions. Why is this study important and which specific hypothesis(es) should be investigated.

 

Methodology:

please shorten some. Describe study repeatability better. Describe the inclusion and exclusion criteria in detail

 

Results:

What are the key results?

Does the graphic representation really match the content of the text section?

Linguistic revision

 

Discussion:

way too long compared to the rest. Partly unclear what is meant, since repetitions are in it.

The hypothesis should be answered at the beginning and then possible aspects should be examined. That is completely absent from the discussion. Please edit the language.

Author Response

Thank you, a point-by-point response is attached for Reviewer 2

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop