Sociodemographic Analysis of Disability in a Highly Depopulated Rural Region: The Case of Soria, Spain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The central issue of this paper is clear and has strong guiding significance for the development of underdeveloped areas, but there are obvious problems in chapter arrangement and mechanism explanation, including the following aspects. The conclusions of this paper are scattered and lack concise summary. What are the influencing mechanisms of social and demographic problems of disability in highly depopulated rural region? This requires the author to strengthen the combing. The current conclusion is mainly to introduce what has been found in this study, and lacks scientific theoretical responses. There are many places in this paper that can be further deepened and condensed in theoretical depth. The significance of this paper should include proposing solutions to practical problems, but it lacks the expression of relevant content. The paper focuses on Soria, but it is inappropriate to analyze the overall population development of Spain in section 3.1.1. Population changes are highly correlated with changes in population density, and it is inappropriate to use them to explain each other in section 3.1.2. In this paper, many charts need to be optimized. The horizontal and vertical coordinates of FIG. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 lack marks, and the legend positions in FIG. 4 are inappropriate.

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 1

The central issue of this paper is clear and has strong guiding significance for the development of underdeveloped areas, but there are obvious problems in chapter arrangement and mechanism explanation, including the following aspects. The conclusions of this paper are scattered and lack concise summary. What are the influencing mechanisms of social and demographic problems of disability in highly depopulated rural region? This requires the author to strengthen the combing. The current conclusion is mainly to introduce what has been found in this study, and lacks scientific theoretical responses. There are many places in this paper that can be further deepened and condensed in theoretical depth. The significance of this paper should include proposing solutions to practical problems, but it lacks the expression of relevant content. The paper focuses on Soria, but it is inappropriate to analyze the overall population development of Spain in section 3.1.1. Population changes are highly correlated with changes in population density, and it is inappropriate to use them to explain each other in section 3.1.2. In this paper, many charts need to be optimized. The horizontal and vertical coordinates of FIG. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 lack marks, and the legend positions in FIG. 4 are inappropriate.

--

In response to this reviewer's comments, the conclusions are implemented and reformulated, which are otherwise correct according to other reviewers.

Regarding the proposal for practical improvements, and as included at the end of the article, it is justified by the seminal and comprehensive nature of this article, necessary to lay the foundations for more complex studies as future research opportunities.

With regard to section 3.1.1, we believe that it is appropriate in order to contextualise the situation of Soria in Spain as a whole. It is a brief analysis that allows us to see the imbalances by region. It starts from the general (briefly) to go to the particular. Therefore, we consider this small section to be necessary and relevant to the research, as other reviewers seem to understand it. In the same sense, demographic changes are linked to population density and this data must be used to explain, analyse and interpret.

figures 1, 2, 3, 3, 5 and 6 are amended according to the reviewer.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the article "Sociodemographic analysis of the reality of disability in the most depopulated region of Southern Europe (Soria, Spain)." Below are my remarks:

• The authors have chosen an interesting and current topic on the reality of disability in the region;
• A clear scientific objective for the article should be included in the abstract and introduction. "Analysis" is a sort of tool that leads to achieving a given goal. In my opinion, the goal needs to be reformulated;
• In the final part of the Introduction, please describe synthetically what the individual sections of the article contain;
• The literature review is correct, while it could still be expanded;
• In my opinion, the keywords have been somewhat incorrectly chosen. The word "Europe" should not be included in the keywords. After searching the literature based on the other keywords, the authors could have used the "Refine results" function to limit them to those produced in European countries. In that case, they would have a more comprehensive view of the articles in this range. My example of a "quick" search in Web of Science yielded a result of 418 articles (using the search: Disability (Topic) and Population (Topic) and Density (Topic), and then narrowing the results to European countries);
• The authors have correctly designed the research process and described the results;
• The authors should also provide a more detailed description of the conclusions and directions of future research;
• References should be properly prepared. E.g. Kalmykova, Y.; Harder, R.; Borgestedt, H.; Svanäng, I. Pathways and Management of Phosphorus in Urban Areas. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16, 928–939.

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 2

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the article "Sociodemographic analysis of the reality of disability in the most depopulated region of Southern Europe (Soria, Spain)." Below are my remarks:

• The authors have chosen an interesting and current topic on the reality of disability in the region;
• A clear scientific objective for the article should be included in the abstract and introduction. "Analysis" is a sort of tool that leads to achieving a given goal. In my opinion, the goal needs to be reformulated In line with the reviewer's comment, target is specified (in red)
• In the final part of the Introduction, please describe synthetically what the individual sections of the article contain; Following the reviewer's comment, methodological aspects are added (in red)
• The literature review is correct, while it could still be expanded;
• In my opinion, the keywords have been somewhat incorrectly chosen. The word "Europe" should not be included in the keywords. After searching the literature based on the other keywords, the authors could have used the "Refine results" function to limit them to those produced in European countries. In that case, they would have a more comprehensive view of the articles in this range. My example of a "quick" search in Web of Science yielded a result of 418 articles (using the search: Disability (Topic) and Population (Topic) and Density (Topic), and then narrowing the results to European countries); In the humbly opinion of the authors, this keyword is correct. By indicating Southern Europe we are delimiting the working space, and it is key for people outside Spain to locate where the province of Soria is in the European context.
• The authors have correctly designed the research process and described the results;
• The authors should also provide a more detailed description of the conclusions and directions of future research; Research opportunities are added
• References should be properly prepared. E.g. Kalmykova, Y.; Harder, R.; Borgestedt, H.; Svanäng, I. Pathways and Management of Phosphorus in Urban Areas. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16, 928–939. Resolved

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In their publication, the authors raised an important topic concerning the problem of the presence of people with disabilities in rural areas who do not have much economic investment. They also pointed to the problem of too little activation of these people in the community. This is a complex problem due to different groups of disabilities, but also age. The analysis of these studies is difficult due to the actually small number of respondents, but this problem has been explained by the authors and it is understandable and reliable. The difficulty of conducting interviews and surveys with the elderly is great, hence the research carried out is valuable.

The research conducted by the authors is important due to the social group and the problem of its systemic exclusion. It is a pity that the authors did not try to present systemic solutions in this region regarding the possibility of activating these people. I know that this would require more research and broadening the scope of the research itself, but at least a framework for such changes could be presented. Nevertheless, the article is interesting, touches on a very important aspect of community life and exclusion through disability. The methods used and the literature are appropriate, as is the discussion of results and conclusions.

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 3

In their publication, the authors raised an important topic concerning the problem of the presence of people with disabilities in rural areas who do not have much economic investment. They also pointed to the problem of too little activation of these people in the community. This is a complex problem due to different groups of disabilities, but also age. The analysis of these studies is difficult due to the actually small number of respondents, but this problem has been explained by the authors and it is understandable and reliable. The difficulty of conducting interviews and surveys with the elderly is great, hence the research carried out is valuable.

The research conducted by the authors is important due to the social group and the problem of its systemic exclusion. It is a pity that the authors did not try to present systemic solutions in this region regarding the possibility of activating these people. I know that this would require more research and broadening the scope of the research itself, but at least a framework for such changes could be presented. Nevertheless, the article is interesting, touches on a very important aspect of community life and exclusion through disability. The methods used and the literature are appropriate, as is the discussion of results and conclusions.

We are very grateful for the review and we will take into account the advice you indicate for future work, which will surely help us to approach future work related to this subject in a more complete way.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

High rates of urbanization in Europe and elsewhere have led to a concentration of population in cities, which provide jobs and a wide range of social services. This is associated with a decrease in population in rural areas. This determines the relevance of the presented research, focused on people with disabilities.

This work is focused on the concept of agency in people with disabilities and, more specifically, the perception and experience of this group in areas of low population density. The study is based on the premise that living in an area with a considerable demographic decline can substantially intensify the difficulties of a social group with a "low agency level". 

The introduction describes the problem, analyzes the literature in this area The object of the study is clearly defined. The aim and objectives need to be clarified.

The methodology included documentary analysis, socio-demographic research and mixed research, which is justified and widely used in such studies.

The research materials were obtained from open sources and from questionnaire and survey data carried out by the authors.

The discussion covers all the objectives, but it is not clear from it whether the O2 objective has been achieved (lines 94,95).

The results of the study are presented in sufficient detail.

The conclusions state the results obtained, confirm the assumptions made.

However, to improve the quality of the publication, authors should pay attention to the following comments.

The aim and objectives should be presented more clearly.

Lines 90-96. Probably these are objectives, the aim is formulated below line 100.

Lines 78, 79 the phrase "the most recent European data are presented" should be replaced and the date of the data in Table 1 should be given. Table 1 should also indicate the dimension in which the population density is given.

Table 1 should be edited. The title of the columns should match the content.

What is given in the second column of Table 2? The number or number of survey participants in each age group?

Figure 1: Distribution of people with disabilities in Spain. Source: developed by the authors.

Only the caption makes it clear that the figure shows the administrative-territorial division of Spain. It is necessary to finalize the figure: to give the names of regions, or capitals of these regions, it is not clear to all readers where they are located. This will make the discussion in the text clearer (lines 232-240).

Lines 247-251 What is the support for the statement made, and what structural problems are involved?

The authors often use the term evolution, but not always correctly. Figure 3 is the change in population from 1900 to 2021. We should name the axes, and end the graph with the year 2021. Is the continuation of the graph over time an extrapolation? Then it should be explained how it is obtained.

Pages 327 - 333 The text needs to be revised. Population size and population density are interrelated. You cannot explain a decrease in population by a decrease in density if the area of the study area is constant. Other reasons must be given here. The authors use the term "demographic desert", which is not quite correct and does not follow from the analysis of population density. It is appropriate to use generally accepted terms.

Pages 384 -386 The assertion of a dramatic increase in the number of adults with disabilities, especially those in their 40s and older, should be confirmed by showing the relative increase in people with disabilities in each age group. Visually, from the graph of Fig. 6 the greater increase is seen in the 55-59 age group.

Figure 7: The name of the axes should be given. The figures on the horizontal axis should be replaced with names, it is not clear what data are given.

The conclusions should more clearly reflect the achievement of the goal and objectives of the study.

The manuscript can be published after correcting the remarks made.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 4

High rates of urbanization in Europe and elsewhere have led to a concentration of population in cities, which provide jobs and a wide range of social services. This is associated with a decrease in population in rural areas. This determines the relevance of the presented research, focused on people with disabilities.

This work is focused on the concept of agency in people with disabilities and, more specifically, the perception and experience of this group in areas of low population density. The study is based on the premise that living in an area with a considerable demographic decline can substantially intensify the difficulties of a social group with a "low agency level". 

The introduction describes the problem, analyzes the literature in this area The object of the study is clearly defined. The aim and objectives need to be clarified. This is taken into account and clarified (in red in the introduction section).

The methodology included documentary analysis, socio-demographic research and mixed research, which is justified and widely used in such studies.

The research materials were obtained from open sources and from questionnaire and survey data carried out by the authors.

The discussion covers all the objectives, but it is not clear from it whether the O2 objective has been achieved (lines 94,95). Resolved in the paper.

The results of the study are presented in sufficient detail. Modified and improved (in red)

The conclusions state the results obtained, confirm the assumptions made.

However, to improve the quality of the publication, authors should pay attention to the following comments.

The aim and objectives should be presented more clearly.

Lines 90-96. Probably these are objectives, the aim is formulated below line 100.

Lines 78, 79 the phrase "the most recent European data are presented" should be replaced and the date of the data in Table 1 should be given. Table 1 should also indicate the dimension in which the population density is given. The years are included in the table referred to in the text.

Table 1 should be edited. The title of the columns should match the content. resolved

What is given in the second column of Table 2? The number or number of survey participants in each age group? Resolved

Figure 1: Distribution of people with disabilities in Spain. Source: developed by the authors. resolved

Only the caption makes it clear that the figure shows the administrative-territorial division of Spain. It is necessary to finalize the figure: to give the names of regions, or capitals of these regions, it is not clear to all readers where they are located. This will make the discussion in the text clearer (lines 232-240). The number of survey participants included in each age group is indicated. I don't know if that is what you mean

Lines 247-251 What is the support for the statement made, and what structural problems are involved?

We humbly believe it is justified by the following paragraph:

“According to the 2012 Social Integration and Health Survey conducted by the INE, the main limitation of this population group, both in the whole of Spain and in Castile and Leon, was being homebound, since over 50% of the people perceived it as a barrier to carry out their activities of daily living, mainly due to the maladaptation of buildings to their needs. It is worth pointing out the problems related to transportation, which is worse and less adapted in Castile and Leon, where 43.27% of people report encountering difficulties, compared to 29.87% of the population in the whole of Spain. Other important barriers are found in the realisation of cultural and leisure activities, with very high percentages, with the general Spanish population reaching 70% and that of Castile and Leon exceeding this percentage. The access to and mobility in buildings, as well as access to adequate employment, continue to present impediments for the daily living of people with disabilities. In regard to access to the Internet and social contact and support, the barriers have been practically removed” (lines 300-312).

The authors often use the term evolution, but not always correctly. Figure 3 is the change in population from 1900 to 2021.

Figure 3 is not the population change, but the evolution of the population, therefore, after reviewing it in the text, the term evolution would be well used. It is not modified.

We should name the axes, and end the graph with the year 2021. Is the continuation of the graph over time an extrapolation? Then it should be explained how it is obtained.

The name is put on the axles as indicated by the reviewer.

Pages 327 - 333 The text needs to be revised. Population size and population density are interrelated. You cannot explain a decrease in population by a decrease in density if the area of the study area is constant. Other reasons must be given here.

We humbly consider that our explanation is correct. A decrease in population can be explained by a decrease in population density. Precisely because the area is constant and the population is not, it is possible to see whether a territory is gaining or losing population. For example:

we have a territory of 10km2 where 10 people live, the density is 1habkm2. If this same territory, then has a population density of 0.5 inhabitants per square kilometer, it means that it has lost population because there are only 5 inhabitants. examples:

Territory 10 km2

1. 10 inhabitants \10km2 = 1 hab\km2
2. 5 inhabitants \10km2 = 0,5 hab\km2
3. 20 inhabitants \10km2 = 2 hab\km2

therefore, we humbly think it is a solid and valid argument

The authors use the term "demographic desert", which is not quite correct and does not follow from the analysis of population density. It is appropriate to use generally accepted terms.

The term demographic desert in geography is correct and correctly used. It is a term accepted by the scientific community and by scientific associations such as the Association of Spanish Geographers. In human geography, an area with less than 10 inhabitants/km2 is considered a demographic desert.

Pages 384 -386 The assertion of a dramatic increase in the number of adults with disabilities, especially those in their 40s and older, should be confirmed by showing the relative increase in people with disabilities in each age group. Visually, from the graph of Fig. 6 the greater increase is seen in the 55-59 age group.

It is correct. The pyramid is the structure of the population of a territory, in this case Soria, and then we talk about the age range with more people with disabilities. The pyramid is used as a support to see the structure of the population.

Figure 7: The name of the axes should be given. The figures on the horizontal axis should be replaced with names, it is not clear what data are given. Resolved

The conclusions should more clearly reflect the achievement of the goal and objectives of the study. Improvement and resolved

The manuscript can be published after correcting the remarks made.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The number of respondents on an online questionnaire is quite small regarding the number of the people with disabilities within the research area. It was explained in the Limitations of the Research, but maybe it should be more elaborated and stressed also in Conclusion. The question is about the impact of the questionnaire on the research and what is "illustrative character"? Conclusion should be more based on statistical data and research. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language is acceptable, but grammar check is recommended.

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 5

The number of respondents on an online questionnaire is quite small regarding the number of the people with disabilities within the research area. It was explained in the Limitations of the Research, but maybe it should be more elaborated and stressed also in Conclusion.

Improvement and resolved

The question is about the impact of the questionnaire on the research and what is "illustrative character"? Conclusion should be more based on statistical data and research. Conclusions are improved. Limits and opportunities are added. It is explained that this is interpretative, descriptive and seminal work, which will lead to more complex and more empirical studies in the future.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study conducted a comprehensive exploration of the disability population in Soria, Spain, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The justification for the study background is well established. Moreover, the materials, methods, and results are effectively presented. With a few structural modifications, it is highly recommended for publication.

To enhance the paper's organization, I suggest adding a sub-section in section two titled "Study Area." This sub-section would provide a contextual overview of the geographic region under investigation. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to include a location map of Soria in order to better comprehend the region's spatial characteristics. This addition would be particularly valuable because one of the study's conclusions highlights the increased challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in this specific area due to its location-related disadvantages. Also, please merge the limitation section to the discussion.

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 6

The study conducted a comprehensive exploration of the disability population in Soria, Spain, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The justification for the study background is well established. Moreover, the materials, methods, and results are effectively presented. With a few structural modifications, it is highly recommended for publication.

To enhance the paper's organization, I suggest adding a sub-section in section two titled "Study Area." This sub-section would provide a contextual overview of the geographic region under investigation.

this could be repetitive, as the study area is already explained in the text.

Furthermore, it would be beneficial to include a location map of Soria in order to better comprehend the region's spatial characteristics.

there is already a location map of Soria. There are two island maps, but they include a location map within the whole of Spain, so we understand that it is sufficient.

This addition would be particularly valuable because one of the study's conclusions highlights the increased challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in this specific area due to its location-related disadvantages. Also, please merge the limitation section to the discussion. Resolved

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 7 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Table 1 contradicts the statement in the text that many of the rural areas suffering most from demographic decline are in southern Europe (and not Southern Europe).

I think the explanation of instrumental case study is not appropriate. An instrumental case study aims to provide insight into a problem or refine a theory, although the case itself is secondary here and may be atypical of other cases. For example, a researcher interested in childhood obesity rates might conduct a study with middle school students and a sports programme. In this case, the focus is not on the children or the exercise programme. The focus is on studying the relationship between children and sports and why certain children  become obese.

In this context, the research design needs to be reconsidered. The socio-demographic study takes up an overwhelming amount of space in the results chapter, making the paper rather dull. From line 204 to 412, the paper is a presentation of statistical data with some graphical visualisations. But the visualisation could also be made more enthusiastic, for example by presenting the text from 213 to 223 in two parallel pictures.

Subchapters 3.2 and 3.3 are more appropriate in terms of relational research to show what this study is about.

The first paragraph in the chapter Discussion should be part of the chapter Introduction.

Again, the content of the Discussion chapter should focus on the relationship between demographic decline and people with disabilities. What is clear in the first consideration, that there are not enough services, provision for people with disabilities etc. when the population is declining, should be demonstrated and discussed. But the authors start with one or two sentences that go in this direction and then turn back to pure statistics.

In the conclusion we read again that there are localities in the province of Soria with a very high degree of depopulation. This is a repetition and not appropriate in the context of the study. We have already learned about this fact.

I think the paper should be rejected as it stands.

There are also the following details which need some correction:

In line 124 the sentence ends: registers of different years1. Please make it understandable.

In lines 142 the sentence defines: Social Integration and Health Survey2 (what is this number for?). The same in line 143 and 145.

There should be also a map with the names of the regions included.

The legend in Figure 1 should be more precise.

In line 246 is Figure 1, not 01.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

The article has undergone a thorough review process by seven esteemed colleagues, a challenge we deeply appreciate. We are immensely grateful for their dedication to enhancing the quality of our work. It is important to note that addressing the feedback from multiple reviewers has been quite challenging. We kindly request the reviewers to bear in mind the complexities we've encountered while striving to incorporate their valuable insights.

Reviewer 7

Table 1 contradicts the statement in the text that many of the rural areas suffering most from demographic decline are in southern Europe (and not Southern Europe).

We add the following explanation (lines 80-83)

We begin by contextualising the province of Soria as one of the most depopulated in the whole of Europe, which is at the head of the walnuts in southern Europe

I think the explanation of instrumental case study is not appropriate. An instrumental case study aims to provide insight into a problem or refine a theory, although the case itself is secondary here and may be atypical of other cases. For example, a researcher interested in childhood obesity rates might conduct a study with middle school students and a sports programme. In this case, the focus is not on the children or the exercise programme. The focus is on studying the relationship between children and sports and why certain children become obese.

We believe that this case helps to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon of disability in depopulated areas, and is therefore useful as an instrumental case.

In this context, the research design needs to be reconsidered. The socio-demographic study takes up an overwhelming amount of space in the results chapter, making the paper rather dull. From line 204 to 412, the paper is a presentation of statistical data with some graphical visualisations. But the visualisation could also be made more enthusiastic, for example by presenting the text from 213 to 223 in two parallel pictures.

The remaining reviews do not address this aspect; on the contrary, the demographic component is indispensable and should carry significant importance. They point out that it is well developed and correct, therefore we humbly understand that the comments of the other reviewers can prevail.

Subchapters 3.2 and 3.3 are more appropriate in terms of relational research to show what this study is about.

The first paragraph in the chapter Discussion should be part of the chapter Introduction.

We move it to the introduction, as indicated by the reviewer (this changes the numbering of the tables).

Again, the content of the Discussion chapter should focus on the relationship between demographic decline and people with disabilities. What is clear in the first consideration, that there are not enough services, provision for people with disabilities etc. when the population is declining, should be demonstrated and discussed. But the authors start with one or two sentences that go in this direction and then turn back to pure statistics.

the rest of the reviews indicate that the conclusions are correct, the discussion is adequate....

In the conclusion we read again that there are localities in the province of Soria with a very high degree of depopulation. This is a repetition and not appropriate in the context of the study. We have already learned about this fact.

These are the conclusions, which is why we feel it is necessary to highlight this fact.

I think the paper should be rejected as it stands.

There are also the following details which need some correction:

In line 124 the sentence ends: registers of different years1. Please make it understandable.

Corrected in the text (notes in square brackets)

In lines 142 the sentence defines: Social Integration and Health Survey2 (what is this number for?). The same in line 143 and 145.

Corrected in the text (notes in square brackets)

There should be also a map with the names of the regions included.

the map is modified and your comment is taken into account.

The legend in Figure 1 should be more precise.

Having reviewed the legend, we understand it to be clear

In line 246 is Figure 1, not 01. Resolved

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The submitted comments, additions and corrections allow us to recommend the manuscript for publication.

Reviewer 7 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

the reviewers' comments are well thought out and a help in writing a better paper. 

Since you simply skipped over many of my well thought out recommendations, I assume you do not need them. In your reply, you should have found a solution to respond to my suggestions. Instead you have referred to other reviewers as they have not commented this, so it is ok.