Social Impact Assessment of HealthyAIR Tool for Real-Time Detection of Pollution Risk

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have presented an application study on the use of the HealthyAIR tool and discussed an air qualty prediction approach in this paper.  The intersting part of the study is the application of a risk computation tool for assessing the social impact.  Such applications are not carried out using risk tools.

I tried the link and it was not working.

Here are some comments to improve the paper:

1.  Abstract indicate two groups.  The groups are are not clear in the abstract.

2.  "Data was"    may want to check    "Data were"

3.  The sample size of 40 appears  small to draw conclusions.  Please justify based on the literature and mathematical tools (to design a study based on number of observations) available on the internet.  Or, expand the study and add more observations.

4.  Check the symbol for decimal.  The symbol used is strange.

5.  Think about Table 6.  Discussion and citation may do the job.

6.  Line 451 shold be section 1.2.

The paper definitly needs a literature review on the techniques used in the statistical analysis to draw conclusions.   The authors should discuss if  the techniques were useful in similar studies.  Why this techique?

Authors should also discuss other risk tools that are available and why they can not be used in this study.

It is not clear how sections 1.1 and 1.2 are connected in the frame work of your stated goal.  Information is useful.  May be you have to add this information some where else so that the paper flows better.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

By means of the present, we are submitting a revised version of the article ‘Social Impact Assessment of HealthyAIR Tool for Real-Time Detection of Pollution Risk’. This version is an improvement taking into account your opinión

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper aims to study the social impact reported by the HealthyAir tool. It is based on a survey with the participation of 40 people. The topic is of great interest, but the paper needs to be revised before it can be published. My key comments: In the study, two different groups, users, and professionals/engines answered the questionnaire. My main concern is the imitated number of surveys. I strongly recommend increasing the number to better support the results. The paper starts with the surveys (Methods), and just on page 9 we better understand the HealthyAir technological solution. Then in section 2.5 (page 11), you explain the data analysis methods. Finally, in section 1.1 (Figure 15) the air quality data measured during COVID-19 is presented. I strongly recommend to reorganizing the paper. My other minor comments are the following: • Please, review the numeration of the paper section (e.g. 1.Conclusion) • Please remove the numeration of the abstract subdivisions. • When you compare pre lockdown data with lockdown period, are you sure that meteo conditions are similar in these two periods? To overcome this aspect, in my opinion, this info could be presented (here or in supplementary materials). • At the end of the introduction, the main strengths of this work should be better highlighted. Why your paper is different from others? • Table 6 is too large. Consider presenting the information in another format. • Please, insert the limitations of the study.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

By means of the present, we are submitting a revised version of the article ‘Social Impact Assessment of HealthyAIR Tool for Real-Time Detection of Pollution Risk’. This version is an improvement taking into account your opinión

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have revised the paper.  Please recheck all the references.  The paper has improved and is ready for publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the improvements. I believe that this version can be published.