Workers and Climate Change: The Need for Academic–Industry Partnerships to Improve Agricultural Worker Health, Safety, and Wellbeing

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The work does not meet the requirements of the research work:

1. This article requires a chapter: Results.
2. The text does not demonstrate the application of the Total Worker Health® approach to improving the health, safety and welfare of agricultural workers
3. The methodology used in the study was not clearly indicated
4. Applications should formulate recommendations for the title of the position.
5. Conclusions should also refer to results that were not collected in the work
6. The use of TWH in portraying the relationship between workers and climate change was too general. How does the TWH approach improve the health, safety and welfare of agricultural workers?

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers for their time in reviewing our initial submission.

Reviewer 1:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work does not meet the requirements of the research work. This article requires a chapter.

• Thank you for this comment. It was our intent that this work be considered as a communication rather than a research manuscript. We have clarified this with the editors.

 

Results. The text does not demonstrate the application of the Total Worker Health® approach to improving the health, safety and welfare of agricultural workers The methodology used in the study was not clearly indicated Applications should formulate recommendations for the title of the position.

• Thank you for this comment. To clarify our communication piece, we have restructured the manuscript to provide subheadings which more clearly articulate the content of the section. We now describe the results in terms of the application of the academic-private partnership.

 

Conclusions should also refer to results that were not collected in the work The use of TWH in portraying the relationship between workers and climate change was too general. How does the TWH approach improve the health, safety and welfare of agricultural workers?

• Upon reflection of this comment we realized that the piece was more focused on the academic-private partnership and the role DrsPH can play in such partnerships. We have removed TWH from the title of the manuscript and restructured the manuscript to reflect this.

Reviewer 2 Report

1. I suggest removing the "Total Worker Health®" from Keywords, as it may make it challenging to search via metadata.
2. I always recommend writing third-person articles.
3. The article consists of "short communication" as there are no concrete data or results in the submitted paper.
4. There is no factual scientific data in the submitted article. 

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers for their time in reviewing our initial submission.

Reviewer 2:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I suggest removing the "Total Worker Health®" from Keywords, as it may make it challenging to search via metadata.

• We appreciate this concern. As TWH is a field with a growing body of literature, we believe that Total Worker Health is an appropriate keyword to keep.

 

I always recommend writing third-person articles.

• We appreciate this comment and have revised the communication so that it is in the third-person.

 

The article consists of “short communication” as there are no concrete data or results in the submitted paper.

• We apologize for the miscommunication. This manuscript should be considered a communication and we have clarified this with the editors.

 

There is no factual scientific data in the submitted article.

• Thank you for this comment. We have clarified with the editors that this piece should be considered a communication and not a research manuscript. We have restructured the manuscript and subheadings to reflect this.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

In my opinion the text is clear. 

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers for their time in reviewing our initial submission.

Reviewer 3:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In my opinion the text is clear.

• Thank you.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

The results of the study are unclear. Where are they shown?

What are the effects of climate change seen in the population of selected workers?

If and how has the health of workers changed before and after the partnership?

Has worker safety in the workplace improved?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please kindly see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The changes suggested by the reviewer were introduced.
Explained that this was a message-style article and adjusted the layout of the text to match this form.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

With the clarification that this is a communication and not an article, I suggest publishing it in this form.
Success in the work being developed by the authors.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper is improved