Evaluation of Mobile Applications for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper contains sufficiently new and adequate information, and it adheres to the journal’s standards. The topic and level of formality are appropriate for the journal`s readership. Its style and readability are suitable. There is a huge amount of information given throughout the article, but I would suggest revising the paper. 

The literature review is poor and I miss recent relevant literature in this area. I suggest citing: PAVLIČ, Jani, TOMAŽIČ, Tina, KOŽUH, Ines. The impact of emerging technology influences product placement effectiveness: a scoping study from interactive marketing perspective. Journal of research in interactive marketing. Article publication date: 23 November 2021, 18 str. ISSN 2040-7122. DOI: 10.1108/JRIM-02-2021-0041- to view the other aspect of scoping review and TOMAŽIČ, Tina, STANOJEVIĆ-JERKOVIĆ, Olivera. Online interventions for the selective prevention of illicit drug use in young drug users : exploratory study. Journal of medical internet research. April 2020, vol. 22, no. 4, DOI: 10.2196/17688 for another aspect of mobile or online applications. Please, add any other relevant literature.

The methodological concept is clear, and the selected methodology is scientifically appropriate, so I absolutely agree with the proposed methodology. This is a valuable approach.

Figure 1- Data selection- should be better explained.

I recommend rewriting the Conclusions.  The concluding remarsk should be more specific and better explained. The limitations are missing. The further research is missing.

In summary, the article is sufficiently interesting to warrant publication, but it needs major revision. Please follow all the comments above.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

minor editing

Author Response

We appreciate the reviewers for your thoughtful suggestions and insights. The manuscript has benefited from these insightful suggestions. If you have any concern, feel free to ask me.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, Lee and Kim reviewed Mobile Applications for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus. The paper is well-written. I only have minor comments:

 

- Figure 1 is not clear. The resolution needs to be improved.

 

- in line 71, there is a typo "17"

 

- What are the meaning of different parameters and how do these parameters affect the progression of diabetes should be included.

 

- Please add more details about the effectiveness of diabetes management apps?

 

- Please add future implications after the conclusions?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

minor editing

Author Response

We appreciate the reviewers for your thoughtful suggestions and insights. The manuscript has benefited from these insightful suggestions. If you have any concern, feel free to ask me.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review article, titled "Evaluation of Mobile Applications for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review" by Lee et al., endeavors to underscore the significance of mobile applications for individuals with diabetes. The authors sought to compile information from previously published articles to succinctly summarize the beneficial effects of mobile applications in managing diabetes. However, the article did not comprehensively evaluate the apps’ usability and functionality, even though, the article sounds good.

The article discussed a limited number of references pertaining to both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Increasing the breadth of relevant articles would enhance the robustness of the findings. In conclusion, my aim is to publish an article that specifically delves into the intersection of mobile applications and the widespread condition of diabetes, addressing both type 1 and type 2 diabetes comprehensively.

Author Response

We appreciate the reviewers for your thoughtful suggestions and insights. The manuscript has benefited from these insightful suggestions. If you have any concern, feel free to ask me.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I agree with the revised version of your paper. No comments.