The Implementation of Dating Violence Prevention Programmes in Portugal and Their Effectiveness: Perspectives of Professionals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents an important reflection about how Portuguese professionals perceive some of the dating violence prevention programmes implemented in Portugal and their impact for their ineffectiveness. The discussion of the findings pointing out to their main limitations and presents a good reflection about them, and can be a good paper to discuss in the future with professionals (e.g., training sessions).

However, some important information needs to be added/clarified at the section “materials and methods”

1)    The authors reported that participants have all experience in the implementation of programmes. Could the authors justify the inclusion of a 19 years old participant in the sample? Considering his/her age, it is not explicit how this participant meets the criteria. Could the authors clarify the territories to which participants belong to? Did they include autonomous regions as well (Madeira and Açores islands)?

2)    CIG helped to forward the invitation to participate, but we do not know how many participants entered in the questionnaire and did not fulfilled the overall questionnaire.

3)    Regarding the instrument, it is missing the literature that helped to build the questionnaire; also, it is not clear the type of questions included on it (e.g., open-ended questions).

4)    Regarding Results, how did the authors come to the categories presented in Table 1? The analysis procedure is not clear enough, which makes it difficult to follow this part of the results.

5)    At the conclusions, could the authors give at least an example of a Portuguese dating violence prevention programme that meets the criteria that makes a prevention programme effective?

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you for all the comments, which alows us to improve the paper.

Best

The paper presents an important reflection about how Portuguese professionals perceive some of the dating violence prevention programmes implemented in Portugal and their impact for their ineffectiveness. The discussion of the findings pointing out to their main limitations and presents a good reflection about them, and can be a good paper to discuss in the future with professionals (e.g., training sessions). 

However, some important information needs to be added/clarified at the section “materials and methods”

• The authors reported that participants have all experience in the implementation of programmes. Could the authors justify the inclusion of a 19 years old participant in the sample? Considering his/her age, it is not explicit how this participant meets the criteria. Could the authors clarify the territories to which participants belong to? Did they include autonomous regions as well (Madeira and Açores islands)?

Information was added concerning different levels of participants' experience and territories.

• CIG helped to forward the invitation to participate, but we do not know how many participants entered in the questionnaire and did not fulfilled the overall questionnaire. 

All the participants who acceded the link fulfilled the overall questionnaire.

• Regarding the instrument, it is missing the literature that helped to build the questionnaire; also, it is not clear the type of questions included on it (e.g., open-ended questions).

Information was added, as well examples of questions.

• Regarding Results, how did the authors come to the categories presented in Table 1? The analysis procedure is not clear enough, which makes it difficult to follow this part of the results. 

The analysis procedure was clarified.

• At the conclusions, could the authors give at least an example of a Portuguese dating violence prevention programme that meets the criteria that makes a prevention programme effective?

This study was about the participants’ perceptions. There is no research on the efficacy of the different programmes that have been implemented in the country.

Reviewer 2 Report

The concept of the study is interesting. However, there is a methodology gap

Key words should be arranged alphabetically (see line 16)

in recent decade   (state the specific time).......................line 19

kindly state the study design

location where the study was conducted was not adequately explained. 

Date of conducting the study is missing. How was field research assistants recruited (if any)

Participants: Give a clear eligibility criteria for selcting the respondents

what are the sources and method of selecting the respondents

Variables: Clearly state all predictors/variables in the study

state the method of measuring each variables

Bias: Any potential effort to address bias

Statistical methods: Describe the statistical method used for the study

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you for all the comments, which alows us to improve the paper.

Best

The concept of the study is interesting. However, there is a methodology gap

Key words should be arranged alphabetically (see line 16)

Done.

in recent decade   (state the specific time).......................line 19

Specific time was added.

kindly state the study design

Information was added

location where the study was conducted was not adequately explained. 

Information was added.

Date of conducting the study is missing. How was field research assistants recruited (if any)

Not applicable.

Participants: Give a clear eligibility criteria for selcting the respondents

what are the sources and method of selecting the respondents

Information was added.

Variables: Clearly state all predictors/variables in the study

state the method of measuring each variables

Bias: Any potential effort to address bias

Statistical methods: Describe the statistical method used for the study

Methodological section was improved.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Regarding 'Data processing and analysis techniques', lines 140-141, the authors added "afterwards, the intercode reliability was tested to define the final themes to be considered" - what do they mean? An intercode reliability was calculated ? (i.e., a specific coefficient?). Only a form os consensus was achieved? Did they followed (Hill et al., 2007) - A Guide to Conducting Consensual Qualitative Research - Clara E. Hill, Barbara J. Thompson, Elizabeth Nutt Williams, 1997 (sagepub.com)

Could the authors add participants' quotes for the open questions?

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you for all the comments. We made clear the question of intercoder reliability and added a reference.

Best

Reviewer 2 Report

Approved

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you for all the comments. 

Best