Next Article in Journal
Comparison of INTEGRA and the Manual Method to Determine the Axis for Intraocular Lens Implantation—A Case Series of 60 Eyes
Previous Article in Journal
Best Practices on Radiology Department Workflow: Tips from the Impact of the COVID-19 Lockdown on an Italian University Hospital
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Association between Vitamin D and Cognitive Deficiency in Alcohol Dependence

Healthcare 2022, 10(9), 1772; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091772
by Visnja Banjac Baljak 1,*, Goran Mihajlovic 2, Nera Zivlak-Radulovic 1, Lana Nezic 3, Mirjana Miskovic 1 and Vesna Banjac 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Healthcare 2022, 10(9), 1772; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091772
Submission received: 14 July 2022 / Revised: 22 August 2022 / Accepted: 9 September 2022 / Published: 14 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Nutrition and Public Health)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript by Baljak et al reports a case control study assessing the relationship between vitamin D content and cognitive impairment in alcohol dependence. The authors found lower levels of vitamin D in alcohol dependent subjects with cognitive impairment, and an overall correlation between vitamin D content and cognitive function across all groups. The authors explain that this is the first report linking vitamin D levels and cognitive function in alcohol dependent subjects.

 

Strengths:

 

This study appears to be designed and performed well. The study design, especially the inclusion and exclusion criteria are thorough and logical. The results are presented in a very clear manner.

 

Limitations:

 

(1) Several demographic factors (e.g., level of education and employment) differed between groups. The authors acknowledge these as confounding factors, but I am wondering if it is possible to differentiate the differences in vitamin D levels as being related to alcohol intake versus education/employment level. Or are all three factors interrelated mechanistically?

 

(2) Minor editing for English spelling and grammar is required. I mainly noticed this in the Abstract.

 

(3) The sentence on line 122 about respondents less than 12 years of age does not seem to belong in this manuscript. I am not sure if any respondents were < 12 years old (I hope not), and I’m not sure how the 1 point awarded is useful in this cognitive test in this study.

 

(4) The last paragraph of the Discussion section seems too long. I suggest having the section on study limitations on line 304 be the beginning of a new paragraph.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you for all your inputs. Please see the attachment.

Kind regards,

Visnja Banjac Baljak

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors
the paper addressed an important and potentially relevant topic.
Only one comment: the final results should be addressed by a multivariate logistic analysis
 
Minor comment:
 
paper that reported pleiotropic effects of vitamin D could be emphasized,
for example
 
Vitamin D in older population: new roles for this 'classic actor'?
Lauretani F, Maggio M, Valenti G, Dall'Aglio E, Ceda GP.Aging Male. 2010 Dec;13(4):215-32
 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you on your inputs. Please see the attachment.

Kind regards,

Visnja Banjac Baljak

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

No further comments

Back to TopTop