Residential Interior Design for People with Special Needs in Thailand Based on Physical Abilities: Age, Gender, and Living Environment Considerations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Complete the data with charts.

Provide design recommendations.

Describe the discussion of the results, adding information about what it means. Add discusion. 

Below are discussed examples of buildings in photos and sketches

Author Response

Please find attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper provides evidence-based studies and ergonomics in design that promote mobility, safety, and healthy living, by incorporating these considerations into interior design. I think the research work is quite comprehensive. However, what pushed my recommendation towards rejection is the scarce elaboration and generalization throughout the manuscript. The scientific contributions, innovative points and  application potential should be well summarized and improved. After careful evaluation, I think the quality of the manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal, and I must therefore reject it.  

The quality of english needs improving.

Author Response

Please find attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, thank you for submitting your important study to the journal. The topic is of great interest, and the study in part well understood. However, in our opinion it lacks clear references to the architectural-building component (photos, drawings, list of critical spaces, urban location of the case studies -at least geographical area). e.g we can read the important relationships between physical (domestic) space and user categories, but there are no clear descriptions of the spaces in which the interviewees live, only brief hints. At the same time, the location in relation to residential areas of the dwellings is mentioned, but we have no references. So, the paper would need to be supplemented from an architectural-building point of view. All this to be updated in chapters 2, 3, 4 and in the conclusions, the latter also to be expanded by mentioning the limits of the work, the concrete potential for future developments

The text is understandable.

Author Response

Please find attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am satisfied with the revised text. Good job.

The paper can be published.

Reviewer 2 Report

None.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, thank you for your effort in integrating the previous version.