Next Article in Journal
Cadence Feedback and Video-Based Engagement Improves Motivation and Performance during Pedalling in Stroke Patients
Previous Article in Journal
Brain Tumor Analysis Using Deep Learning and VGG-16 Ensembling Learning Approaches
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 12
Issue 14
10.3390/app12147284
Review Report
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Assessment of Diagnostic Radiology Facilities Technical Radiation Protection Requirements in KSA

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(14), 7284; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12147284
by Jaber Alyami 1,2,3,* and M. H. Nassef 4,5,*,†
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Wanxin Wen
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(14), 7284; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12147284
Submission received: 17 June 2022 / Revised: 8 July 2022 / Accepted: 13 July 2022 / Published: 20 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Applied Biosciences and Bioengineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper shows good qualitative aspects.

The paper needs to be improved with more quantitative aspects, plots, numbers, tables, comparison with similar cases.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the overall positive assessment of our manuscript. We are very grateful for the constructive feedback. We have made the changes (highlighted in yellow).

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper introduced the radiation protection requirements and the status of applying the national regulatory standards for the diagnostic facilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). It is helpful for the colleagues of KSA and other countries to learn the status of radiation protection in radiological diagnosis application in KSA. Some suggestions are as follows.

1.     The assessment was based on the data published by the KSA-SFDA report in 2015. It is better to use the latest data if you have them.

2.     A new paragraph and figure like Figure 1 is required to explain the annual personal dose level of the staff or workers for the different KSA governorates. It is better if you can present the collective dose level  of the staff or workers for the different KSA governorates.

3.     It is also suggested to present the dose rate level of supervised area for the different KSA governorates.

4.     It is also suggested that the violations to the national regulatory standards mentioned in the abstract and discussion section are emphasized in the conclusion again.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the overall positive assessment of our manuscript. We are very grateful for the constructive feedback. We have made the changes (highlighted in yellow).

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper has been improved with some quantitative aspects, plots, numbers, tables, comparison with similar cases and several corrections have been applied.

It needs to revise some form of the text, i.e. plots, alignment of paragraphs and tables to the body of the text, same text in the tables, etc.

A new overall check before the submission is needed.

Author Response

We would like to thank again this reviewer for the feedback of our paper and we have revised the manuscript accordingly

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop