Next Article in Journal
Animal- and Plant-Based Protein Sources: A Scoping Review of Human Health Outcomes and Environmental Impact
Next Article in Special Issue
Comparison between Self-Completed and Interviewer-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recalls in Cancer Survivors: Sampling Bias and Differential Reporting
Previous Article in Journal
Long Noncoding RNA, MicroRNA, Zn Transporter Zip14 (Slc39a14) and Inflammation in Mice
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Arabic Version of the Adult Eating Behavior Questionnaire among Saudi Population: Translation and Validation
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Association between Dietary Behaviors and BMI Stratified by Sex and the ALDH2 rs671 Polymorphism in Japanese Adults

Nutrients 2022, 14(23), 5116; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14235116
by Maki Igarashi 1, Shun Nogawa 2, Tsuyoshi Hachiya 2,3, Kyohei Furukawa 1,†, Shoko Takahashi 2, Huijuan Jia 1, Kenji Saito 1,2 and Hisanori Kato 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nutrients 2022, 14(23), 5116; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14235116
Submission received: 1 November 2022 / Revised: 20 November 2022 / Accepted: 23 November 2022 / Published: 1 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Dietary Surveys and Nutritional Epidemiology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. It presents an extremely pertinent and important topic. Nevertheless, I have a few reservations.

- The introduction is too short, currently presenting neither the current knowledge nor the research gap that the authors wanted to address.

- the objective lacks a hypothesis or research question.

- the tables do not include results for statistical tests and for correlation coefficients.

Author Response

We appreciate these comments. Following them, we modified our manuscript. The modified parts of the text are shown in red.


Comment: Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. It presents an extremely pertinent and important topic. Nevertheless, I have a few reservations.

- The introduction is too short, currently presenting neither the current knowledge nor the research gap that the authors wanted to address.

Response: Thank you for this important comment. Following this comment, we modified and added a paragraph in the introduction (lines 43-56). In addition, we modified in Discussion (lines 186-192).

Along with those, we have added 11 citations.

 

Comment: - the objective lacks a hypothesis or research question.

Response: We are grateful for this comment. We modified the introduction section (lines 57-60).

 

Comment: - the tables do not include results for statistical tests and for correlation coefficients.

Response: Thank you for this comment. As per the comment, we added beta and SD in Table 1 and statistical methods in the footnote.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I read your article with interest. Your desription is exellent and it is well written and easy to read. You adress the shortcommings of your study. Nonetheles I feel these findings are significant and warrant publication.

Author Response

We are grateful for the favorable comments. We are very honored that you considered our research worth publishing, even in light of some limitations of our research.

Back to TopTop