Next Article in Journal
Social Stratification, Diet Diversity and Malnutrition among Preschoolers: A Survey of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Next Article in Special Issue
Less Animal-Based Food, Better Weight Status: Associations of the Restriction of Animal-Based Product Intake with Body-Mass-Index, Depressive Symptoms and Personality in the General Population
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring In Vivo Dynamics of Bovine Milk Derived Gangliosides
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

The Impact of Nutrition and Intestinal Microbiome on Elderly Depression—A Systematic Review

Nutrients 2020, 12(3), 710; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12030710
by Blanka Klimova *, Michal Novotny and Martin Valis
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nutrients 2020, 12(3), 710; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12030710
Submission received: 8 February 2020 / Revised: 23 February 2020 / Accepted: 5 March 2020 / Published: 7 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition, Lifestyle and Mood Disorders)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1) The manuscript need proofreading by proficient English speaker. This is already evident since the title, which I would rather rephase as follows: “The impact of nutrition and intestinal microbiome on elderly depression. A systematic review”.
2) The abstract should be a structured one. The rationale and background should be just one or two sentences. The methods should mention the PRISMA guidelines. The results should be as much quantitative as possible, even if this is a systematic review instead of meta-analysis. The limitations are not presented. The discussion should briefly mention the impact for the clinical practice and forthcoming studies on the matter.
3) Methods: there is a coarse mistake: the number of the screened studies or included papers should be part of the results! The authors are strongly encouraged to follow the PRISMA checklist in a very rigorous manner… Please use bullet points for the primary outcomes you planned to extract into advance. The methods are totally flawed. Again, please take a look at good PRISMA-complaint reports already appraised in the literature, even on other topics, to set it-up correctly.
4) There are also very gross mistakes in the flow chart: for example, “they” should read “the”, but no number is given in the box. The excluded studies should be more concisely summarized.
5) The conclusions are too concise and poorly focused with respect to the clinical implications for treatment and prevention.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors reviewed the role of nutrition in elderly depression. This review is well written, and is of interest for the readers of the journal. The following concerns should be addressed .

 

Minor concerns:

1) Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) play a role in elderly depression. Some preclinical findings suggest the role of PUFA metabolism in depression. The following articles should be cited and discussed.

  a) Ren Q, et al. PNAS USA 2016.

  b) Hashimoto K. Front Pharmacol. 2019

  c) Atone J, et al. Prostagrandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2019.

2) Preclinical data: Stress plays a role in the depression. The following articles on the role of gut microbiota in depression-like phenotype should be cited and discussed.

 a) Wang S, et al. J Affect Disord. 2020.

 b) Zhang K, et al. Transl Psychiatry 2019.

 c) Yang C, et al. Transl Psychiatry 2019.

 d) Xie R, et al. J Psychiatr Res 2020.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for incorporating my suggested editing.

Back to TopTop