Stakeholder Views of Epilepsy in the Biology Classroom: A Qualitative Exploratory Pilot Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I applaud the author's desire to investigate teaching students about epilepsy. 1- While methodology with qualitative interviews is appropriate, the choice of participants lacked school nurses or health care professionals other than physicians. School nurses, or nurses in general are the health care professional involved in educating patients and families and addressing health conditions and ramifications in community environment such as a school. 

2- The authors choose to focus on teaching about epilepsy in biology class, despite some participants suggesting it be done in other classes. The article would have been best if the location of teaching was part of the information being sought. Personally and professionally, I believe that biology class for an 8th grade class is not appropriate for teaching about epilepsy as a health condition. In biology one would teach about brain behavior and could use epilepsy as an example. However, the majority of people stated in the study that this would not be primary aim of teaching students about epilepsy. The primary aims to increase awareness, help people learn how to respond to seizures, decrease stigma, address social issues for example, would best be addressed in a health class. It would be helpful for authors to discuss this issues in discussion or in limitation - that aims and location of teaching need to be rectified before creating a curriculum.

3- The authors cited many articles and teacher participants that said their knowledge of epilepsy was insufficient to teach others. In reference list are some studies that evaluated this further or compared methods of teaching. Sharing results of appropriate articles could have been helpful in discussion. 

4- grammar could be improved in some places and on page 2, line 55 I am used to a sentence being written out then reference number used instead of putting reference number within body of sentence. I don't know what that means. 

5- Results of qualitative interviews could have been summarized in results with themes rather than citing individual comments all the time. The results were hard to follow. 

6- The authors brought up the complexities of epilepsy as to why it may be hard for some teachers to teach this subject. This should also pertain to using students with epilepsy to teach part of the course. Since there are many different types of epilepsy, comorbidities, consequences etc. a course on epilepsy should carefully consider how different professionals, people with epilepsy and caregivers are incorporated into the course to maximize each person's experiences and impact on the subject. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your efforts to improve our manuscript. Please find attached our response to the issues you have addressed.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The wording of the conclusions
The inclusion of bibliographical references in the conclusions makes it indistinguishable from the discussion.
The conclusions, in my opinion, should be the most important contributions of the study. They are their own and specific.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your efforts to improve our manuscript. We have changed the conclusion according to your wishes.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your efforts to improve our manuscript. Please find attached our response to the issues you have addressed.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have replied adequately to all of the reviewer's questions.

Author Response

Thank you.