Next Article in Journal
Modified TPP-MoS2 QD Blend as a Bio-Functional Model for Normalizing Microglial Dysfunction in Alzheimer’s Disease
Previous Article in Journal
Cerebellar Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy Mimicking Anti-Yo-Antibody-Associated Rapidly Progressive Cerebellar Syndrome
 
 
Systematic Review
Peer-Review Record

Investigating the Predictive Value of Thyroid Hormone Levels for Stroke Prognosis

Neurol. Int. 2023, 15(3), 926-953; https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15030060
by Aimilios Gkantzios 1,†, Vaia Karapepera 1,†, Dimitrios Tsiptsios 1,*, Eirini Liaptsi 1, Foteini Christidi 1, Elena Gkartzonika 2, Stella Karatzetzou 1, Christos Kokkotis 3, Mihail Kyrtsopoulos 1, Anna Tsiakiri 1, Paschalina Bebeletsi 1, Sofia Chaidemenou 1, Christos Koutsokostas 1, Konstantinos Tsamakis 4, Maria Baltzi 3, Dimitrios Mpalampanos 3, Nikolaos Aggelousis 3 and Konstantinos Vadikolias 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Neurol. Int. 2023, 15(3), 926-953; https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15030060
Submission received: 30 June 2023 / Revised: 26 July 2023 / Accepted: 28 July 2023 / Published: 2 August 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

You have done a commendable job. The article looks fine to me in its present form and ready to get published. 

Thanks,

The Reviewer

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Many thanks for your kind words and your time spent reviewing our manuscript.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Dr Tsiptsios

Reviewer 2 Report

see below

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

minor revision

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Many thanks for your prompt response and the time spent reviewing our manuscript.

Your comments were thoroughly investigated and appropriate modifications in the text were made, as follows:

  • First, we have divided Table 1 into three distinct tables based on their relationship to the outcome prognosis.
  • Secondly, we have corrected the sub-numbering in Section 4.
  • Finally, as for lines 334-335, we added a few lines considering the results of the studies you suggested.

Looking forward to your follow up comments.

 

Yours Sincerely 

Dr Tsiptsios

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, thank you for this comprehensive review.

Just one comment -please shorten the introduction. 50 - 60 lines would do. Especially lines 45-50 as well as sentence starting on line 33 -39 are not needed in such a paper as those are wellknown facts.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Many thanks for your prompt response.

According to your suggestion we have shortened the lines 45-50 and the sentence starting on lines 33 -39. Consequently, the total length of the introduction was also diminished to some degree.

 

Looking forward to your follow up comments.

 

Yours Sincerely 

Dr Tsiptsios

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

no comments

Back to TopTop