Next Article in Journal
Discriminant Analysis PCA-LDA Assisted Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy for Direct Identification of Malaria-Infected Red Blood Cells
Next Article in Special Issue
Development and Characterisation of a Four-Plex Assay to Measure Streptococcus pyogenes Antigen-Specific IgG in Human Sera
Previous Article in Journal
Clinical Considerations and Outcomes for Spine Surgery Patients with a History of Transplant: A Systematic Scoping Review Protocol
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Polarized Raman Spectroscopic Method for Advanced Analyses of the Osteon Lamellar Structure of Human Bone
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
MPs
Volume 5
Issue 3
10.3390/mps5030048
Review Report
mps-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
Protocol
Peer-Review Record

Healthcare Service Interventions to Improve the Healthcare Outcomes of Hospitalised Patients with Extreme Obesity: Protocol for an Evidence and Gap Map

Methods Protoc. 2022, 5(3), 48; https://doi.org/10.3390/mps5030048
by Caz Hales 1,*, Rebecca Chrystall 1, Anne M. Haase 2 and Mona Jeffreys 3
Reviewer 1:
Edna Nava
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Methods Protoc. 2022, 5(3), 48; https://doi.org/10.3390/mps5030048
Submission received: 12 April 2022 / Revised: 5 June 2022 / Accepted: 6 June 2022 / Published: 8 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Methods and Protocols 2022)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The protocol Healthcare Service Interventions to Improve the Healthcare Outcomes of Hospitalised Patients with Extreme Obesity: Protocol for an Evidence and Gap Map, aims to Identify available systematic reviews, primary studies, and impact and outcome based evaluations of healthcare service interventions for hospitalised patients with extreme obesity.

A very last advice is to recommend the authors to use the term “people with obesity” or “population with obesity” as advised by the latest Guidelines to manage obesity instead of the term “obese” or overweight that may not currently sound politically correct. It is important to make those modifications in the article.

I consider the methodological proposal interesting, but in the last section (5 Participation of the stakeholders), an unclear closure is left of what was achieved in the face-to-face meetings, it is suggested to discuss a little more and what will happen in the meeting in May 2022; the closing of this section is only described about the group formed and not more about what will be done to achieve its objectives, so it is recommended to expand this section.

If these critiques are addressed, then this paper will be ready to be published.  

Author Response

Please see attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is a protocol about the methods for a systematic review of the literature looking for the identification of gaps that would implemented the treatments of patients with extreme obesity. I think the paper is well written and the goals are clear. The authors have included all the methodological aspects that a systematic review requires. I have only few comments:

- please introduce all the acronyms used (for example OECD, line 33)

- I think the psychological/psychiatric factors are quite underestimated in the overall methods. Please evaluate the inclusion of elements like bodyimage concerns or psychiatric conditions. Indeed, intervention for extremely obese patients has been linked to body image changes. 

- it is not clear to me the role of the advisory panel member at the end of the paper. Should they be moved to the acknowledge paragraph?

Author Response

Please see attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop