Title: Inflammatory bowel disease Patients' Perspectives of non-medical needs
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
No - there are major issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the
EFA/CFA. A more elegant approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates
of these factors. I would suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the EFA/CFA. A more elegant
approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates of these factors. I would
suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
Title: Inflammatory bowel disease Patients' Perspectives of non-medical needs
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
No - there are major issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the
EFA/CFA. A more elegant approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates
of these factors. I would suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the EFA/CFA. A more elegant
approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates of these factors. I would
suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Inflammatory bowel disease Patients' Perspectives of non-medical needs
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
No - there are major issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the
EFA/CFA. A more elegant approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates
of these factors. I would suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
It remains uncertain why demographic variables were included in the EFA/CFA. A more elegant
approach would be to identify factors and then assess the correlates of these factors. I would
suggest removing demographic variables from the EFA/CFA.
The use of 12 factors also needs to be justified - how will researchers or clinicians use this many
constructs in clinical or research work? How is this informative?
If there were a series of EFA/CFA on different scales, it cannot then be presented as one CFA.
This remains confusing.
By what definition is a 12 factor model with 56 items efficient?
assistant