Effect of Korean Dental Hygienists’ Experiences Related to the Elderly on Their Perception of Human Rights Violations of the Elderly: A Cross-Sectional Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have taken into account both my previous comments and those of other reviewers and I believe that they have addressed all the details or clarifications that were requested.
Overall, the article as a whole has been made more solid, especially with the addition of the questionnaire which greatly helps readers to put themselves in the picture and to understand much better what the items consist of and to which question they respond.
Reviewer 2 Report
The modifications have substantially improved the article.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The relationship between human rights violations, dental hygienists, and oral health or care is not clearly reflected in the title, abstract, introduction, or objectives. These concepts, in the very wording of the article, are not well linked or concatenated.
There are theoretical concepts in the discussion that, if they had also been included in the introduction, would give a better account of what is intended to be reported in this article (lines 251-258).
The stated objectives seem to be different each time they are presented: Lines 11-12, Lines 108-109, Lines: 267-269.
A rethinking of the title and objectives of the study and an expansion of the concepts developed in the introduction would be convenient to give greater relevance to the results found in this study.
Author Response
The relationship between human rights violations, dental hygienists, and oral health or care is not clearly reflected in the title, abstract, introduction, or objectives. These concepts, in the very wording of the article, are not well linked or concatenated.
à We modified the title to suit the purpose of the study.
There are theoretical concepts in the discussion that, if they had also been included in the introduction, would give a better account of what is intended to be reported in this article (lines 251-258).
à We have added content to the introduction.
The stated objectives seem to be different each time they are presented: Lines 11-12, Lines 108-109, Lines: 267-269.
à We have unified all the research objectives.
A rethinking of the title and objectives of the study and an expansion of the concepts developed in the introduction would be convenient to give greater relevance to the results found in this study.
à Thank you for your review. We have made all changes according to your comments.
Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule for our paper.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
General overview
The article, overall, has a remarkable methodological work and possesses the quality and relevance to be published, although the authors need to give further details in the final sections and check several points throughout the work.
Point 1: Data provided in lines 52 to 54 seem correct but it would be pertinent to add either a bibliographical reference or the links from which the data were obtained.
Point 2: According to the review of the role of older people and their treatment in the different plans and visions of the main institutions at world level, it is convenient in the final section (lines 87 to 92, for example) to add some mention to the approach not only emerging, but in some countries already established, of active ageing. Some references could be :
-Report on the Evolution of the Blueprint on Digital Transformation of Health and Care for the Ageing Society. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eip/ageing/sites/eipaha/files/news/we4aha_blueprint_update_publishable_version_december_2019.pdf
-World report on ageing and health. Available at: http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/world-report-2015/en/
-Petretto DR, Pili R, Gaviano L, Matos López C, Zuddas C. Active ageing and success: A brief history of conceptual models. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol. 2016;51(4):229–41.
Point 3: A general understanding of the professional profiles incorporated and their segmentation may benefit from further explanation of the criteria listed in lines 147-151, detailing a little more about what is covered by each of the categories. For example, the categories "experience of receiving education related to the elderly", and "experience of volunteer work related to the elderly' can involve the educational background necessary to obtain the professional qualification? Do they have to be beyond the educational/formation background? Both situations are part of what these categories are intended to capture? On the other hand, the category 'experience of being interested in issues related to the elderly' is very vague in terms of explanation, and further specification of what is meant by 'interest' would improve the distinction and importance of the latter category. The same goes for the six 'sub-factors' or 'sub-items', which require more detail to understand what they cover.
Point 4: I would value relocating the first paragraph of the "discussion" section (lines 250 to 270) to the final part of the introduction, where I think it makes much more sense and helps to better understand the importance of the topic addressed and the research.
Point 5: It is advisable to add the questionnaire or the statements of the questions used to get a picture of its contents and the format of the questions.
Point 6: The conclusions and results require more analysis and detail to enhance the value of the research.
Author Response
General overview
The article, overall, has a remarkable methodological work and possesses the quality and relevance to be published, although the authors need to give further details in the final sections and check several points throughout the work.
Point 1: Data provided in lines 52 to 54 seem correct but it would be pertinent to add either a bibliographical reference or the links from which the data were obtained.
à We have corrected the location of the references appropriately.
Point 2: According to the review of the role of older people and their treatment in the different plans and visions of the main institutions at world level, it is convenient in the final section (lines 87 to 92, for example) to add some mention to the approach not only emerging, but in some countries already established, of active ageing. Some references could be :
à We modified the contents of 'the oral condition and general health of the elderly' to understand the "discussion" part. Thank you very much for your references.
Point 3: A general understanding of the professional profiles incorporated and their segmentation may benefit from further explanation of the criteria listed in lines 147-151, detailing a little more about what is covered by each of the categories.
For example, the categories "experience of receiving education related to the elderly", and "experience of volunteer work related to the elderly' can involve the educational background necessary to obtain the professional qualification? Do they have to be beyond the educational/formation background? Both situations are part of what these categories are intended to capture?
On the other hand, the category 'experience of being interested in issues related to the elderly' is very vague in terms of explanation, and further specification of what is meant by 'interest' would improve the distinction and importance of the latter category.
à We have specifically revised the content.
The same goes for the six 'sub-factors' or 'sub-items', which require more detail to understand what they cover.
à We detail the six sub-items in Table 1.
Point 4: I would value relocating the first paragraph of the "discussion" section (lines 250 to 270) to the final part of the introduction, where I think it makes much more sense and helps to better understand the importance of the topic addressed and the research.
à We added content to the “Introduction” part.
Point 5: It is advisable to add the questionnaire or the statements of the questions used to get a picture of its contents and the format of the questions.
à We detail the six sub-items in Table 1.
Point 6: The conclusions and results require more analysis and detail to enhance the value of the research.
à We supplemented the 'Results' part and revised the ' Conclusions ' part.
à Thank you for your review. We have made all changes according to your comments.
Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule for our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments to the added text:
Although I am not an expert in writing in English, I consider that it is necessary to do a good general review of the language because it seems to me that there are several errors.
Title:
This version seems better, but the sentence following the colon should be changed to, “a cross-sectional study”
Abstract:
The last sentence should be modified, in accordance with the modifications made in the conclusions of the article.
Discussion:
According to the title and objective of the study, here it should be said that dental hygienists should have a better perception of the rights of the elderly and not that they are the ones who should "respect those rights".
Conclusions:
Perhaps due to wording problems, it is not clear to me whether the authors propose that the courses should be taught to the elderly or to dental hygienists.
Author Response
Comments to the added text:
Although I am not an expert in writing in English, I consider that it is necessary to do a good general review of the language because it seems to me that there are several errors.
Title:
This version seems better, but the sentence following the colon should be changed to, “a cross-sectional study”
à We corrected it.
Abstract:
The last sentence should be modified, in accordance with the modifications made in the conclusions of the article.
à We corrected it.
Discussion:
According to the title and objective of the study, here it should be said that dental hygienists should have a better perception of the rights of the elderly and not that they are the ones who should "respect those rights".
à We corrected it.
Conclusions:
Perhaps due to wording problems, it is not clear to me whether the authors propose that the courses should be taught to the elderly or to dental hygienists.
à We corrected it.
Thank you very much for your review.
We hope that our revised paper has been well revised in your opinion.
Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
