Stress Responses of Examiners during Ophthalmic Examination Practices in Healthy Young Students

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I recommend making the corrections I suggested below. Regards.

1. A subsection titled "Statistical Analyses" should be added within the Materials and Methods section. This subsection should include the statistical methods employed in the study and the assumptions underlying these methods. For instance, the distinction between Pearson's product-moment correlation and Pearson correlation, which were utilized in the study, should be explained. Why use kendall’s rank correlation instead of spearman correlation? The assumptions of the dependent t-test should be explained.

2. It should be clarified whether the assumptions of the statistical tests described and interpreted in the Results section are met or not.These should be documented within the Results section.

3. Why show two p value scores between I/4e and next 10 min in the Figure 4c?

4. Could a repeated measures ANOVA (or Friedman test) be utilized based on the dataset used in the study? If the answer is yes, this test should be employed. If the answer is no, the reasons for its inapplicability must be elaborated upon in the Discussion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Congrats

1. This study, which tries to measure performance anxiety, which is a problem at the beginning of many practical trainings and which is often on the agenda, with a number of qualitative and quantitative indicators, has been considered noteworthy.

2. The results are interesting.

But some minor bugs should be fixed. For example;

3. Spelling and grammatical errors should be corrected, as in the example of combining "maybe" in line 24 of the abstract.

4. The abbreviation of “LF/HF” is not written or I could not see it!

 

Minor corrections are needed

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This is well written manuscript regarding stress events in the practice of the medical students. It is very actual topic  and reviewed research  might be very interesting for riders, especially data regarding Golldman test as a visual field kinetic perimetry test, in which interactions between the examiner and examinee are essential.. We article might be accept in the current view.

Author Response

Thank you for your kind comment. We are so encouraged for further studies.

Reviewer 4 Report

Please state the demographics in results not methods (Healthy fourth or third-year undergraduate students (n = 40; female = 33, male = 7) ,average age was 21.43 ± 0.36 years (mean ± standard deviation) at the time of the experiments.)

 

Results

Avoid explanations in Results:

130 - (It was unlikely that the reduction in ACTH resulted from a negative-feedback control of the ACTH  secretion caused by the increased plasma cortisol.)

200 -These data can be explained if participants were anxious about upcoming GP tests 200 before the first blood sampling and, once the GP tests began, they felt rather relieved con-201 ducting the procedure they had practiced many times.

These points should be in discussion.

Discussion

Avoid referring to figures in discussion.

Table 1 appears to be qualitative results and is best for results section.

This study was done during COVID19. Did this impact the practice of GP or affected stress in anyway for the participants?

No mention of any limitations of this work. (validity of measures, sampling bias, interpretation of associations )

Any other recommendations apart from teaching students how to cope?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf