Managing Extreme Heat and Smoke: A Focus Group Study of Vulnerable People in Darwin, Australia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this study, the authors described how extreme heat and smoke are perceived and managed by three different groups of vulnerable people in Darwin. The topic is interesting because of the need to develop an effective policy strategy to minimize negative impact of heat and smoke on work, health and activity.

The authors  wrote their article clearly and there is a good coherence  and succession of ideas between the different parts. I only propose to develop part introduction (page 1 : line 37 to 43 and line 44 to 49) by describing briefly the pathophysiological effects of heat and smoke on the body. Apart from this, I give strongly a favorable opinion for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The main aim of this study was to gain an understanding of the impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality (the research was conducted in Darwin in Australia), and how individuals perceived and managed these environmental conditions. Regarding the authors, I would like to congratulate and thank them for their effort and motivation involved in this research study. The presentation of the research is well documented, with a scientific basis and respects the latest standards regarding the highest level scientific publications. The methodology was chosen correctly. The conclusions support and result from the research and open new directions for future research. The submitted work is interesting, but in my opinion the weakest part is the discussion, referring to a small number of references and not very substantive. Please strengthen it by adding similar studies and comparing them. In addition, please annotate the manuscript with the research hypotheses that the authors assumed before embarking on the study.

I keep my fingers crossed for the final success of the publication, which in my opinion is really good.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 

Title:

 Managing extreme heat and smoke: A focus group study of vulnerable people in Darwin, Australia

Sharon L. Campbell, Carina C. Anderson, Amanda J. Wheeler, Stephen Cook, Tim Muster, Fay H. Johnston  

The paper focuses on an important issue of nowadays related to phenomena as: extreme heat and poor air quality arising from landscape fires are an increasing at global level, driven by anthropogenic climate change. Previous studies have shown these environmental conditions are associated with negative health outcomes especially for vulnerable people. Managing and adapting to these conditions in a warming climate can present substantial difficulties, especially in climates already at risk for humans’ settlements.

We consider that the paper cannot be published in this form.

Abstract

Please structure the abstract as:

Introduction-Aims

Method

Results and interpretation

 

Introduction:

Please develop the literature review and update to 2022

Please analyses critically the findings of the articles and the limitations.

Please indicate also at least tree similar article to your research published recently (last 5 years).

Line 267: Figure 2. Map of the Northern Territory

Scale and orientation element is missing. Or insert sketch instead of word  ,,map,,

Please complete the title of this figure

Please revise.

Line 109

Methodology should be inserted as subchapter of your paper.

Data collection and analysis can be included as step in the methodology section.

Line 394

Subchapter 4.1. Comparison to existing literature move please to literature review

Discussion subchapter is too short and not fully relevant presented. Must be developed and revised.

What is the main question addressed by the research?

The main question addressed. The subject to which the paper address is very actual one. There are no many connections between the title and the abstract of the paper and the content of the paper. The paper review of wide range of articles (but still must develop) in this research domain; their advantages and disadvantages etc but the sections would be merged in the same subchapter.

Is it relevant and
interesting?

The paper is relevant especially nowadays in the complex environment. It synthetizes the actual available literature data. The sociologic study seems incomplete and very poor. The results not satisfactory presented and discussed.

How original is the topic?

Is an actual topic with medium degree of originality; but it is important subject especially nowadays, authors findings confirmed that proposed management models can successfully contribute to wellbeing of individuals in a part of Australia.

What does it add to the subject
area compared with other published material?

The paper is well documented because the authors cited more than 50 scientific published articles; we suggested to develop and to be updated to 2022.

Is the paper well written?

The paper is well written. The quality of English translation is very good.

Is the text clear and easy to read?

The text is not very well structured. Methodology section must be revised seriously.

Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented?

The results and discussions and conclusions must be developed.

 

October 2022

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

-