Remote Monitoring Model for the Preoperative Prehabilitation Program of Patients Requiring Abdominal Surgery
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
Thanks for submitting your work to the journal. You reviewed the literature on prehabilitation before cancer surgery, supervised or not, and propose a new model of monitoring.
You have to be commended for this comprehensive work and the direct clinical application.
The paper is easy to read and well balanced.
I think that you were a bit to cautious regarding the scope of the work. This manuscript may be interesting for a relatively broad public. Therefore, I would suggest to slightly modify the title with something like: Prehabilitation before cancer surgery, models and monitoring.
Abstract: You may write in the second paragraph: This article presents a review of the literature and the development
You can check the rest of the manuscript to make sure it is clear to the reader that you are presenting a review of the literature and that you are summarizing it in a narrative way (so, at least in the abstract and at the end of the introduction).
Author Response
Kindly find in the attached file the answer on your respectable comments.
Regards;
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors have developed a mathematical model toward providing a solution for both the healthcare provider and patients. This will support the patient monitoring when performing the prescribed physical exercises in real time.
Authors should describe in more detail at the end of section 1 their contribution and differentiation from their previous work in [19] because it is misleading.
Section 2 describes in detail the prehabilitation programs. Authors should improve this section introducing a more concrete paragraph explaining the program they have adopted and then to proceed with section 3.
The overall presentation of the paper can be significantly improved sustaining a smooth transition from section to section.
It is not clear if authors tested the method on a specific number of individuals. Authors should clarify if this method has been applied to a specific sample of individuals or if it includes results generated from laboratory testing of their method.
The generated CSV file from the proposed method is not a suitable media for delivering results to the caregivers. They cannot deal with these files unless they get support from informatics specialists. Authors mention that a WEB application is going to be developed for this method assisting caregivers to monitor in real time the individuals. However, authors should provide a figure including a flow diagram explaining the paths of their mathematical model because it does not help caregivers to comprehend how and what exactly they measure using the method and how to gain from the produced results.
Correct line 377 "by identifying the ??" What is the number of the consecutive days there?
The graphs are explained in detail and results are well documented.
Author Response
Kindly find the answer on your respectable comments.
Regards;
Khalid
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The text added has spelling errors.
Authors now use the number of patients enrolled.
Authors could create a table to summarize the results above figure 6.
A figure described the method followed should be added.
The presentation of the results and discussion requires improvement.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Kindly find the response to your comments in the attached file.
Regards;
Khalid
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors have addressed comments successfully. Figure 1 should be clearer.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments.
Figure 1 has been changed and now is clear.
Regards;
Khalid
