COVID-19 and the Endocrine System: A Review of the Current Information and Misinformation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Peer Review  

COVID-19 and the Endocrine System A Review on Current In-2 formation and Misinformation

This study is a paper reviewing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and endocrine abnormalities.

It is a very interesting study. However, some minor corrections are needed.

COVID-19 and the Endocrine System: A Review of the Current Information and Misinformation”

Abstract

Rather than the method itself, please list the endocrine abnormalities that have been reported in COVID-19 patients and those caused due to vaccine administration separately.

INTRODUCTION

For the RAAS pathway and ACE2, spell out in full any terms that appear at first instance.

Materials and Methods

Did you not include adrenal insufficiency in your search terms?

3.3. Pancreas

We believe that hyperglycemia in critically ill patients may be due to the use of steroids such as Decadron. Kindly mention this.

In the Conclusion section, kindly provide a brief summary of this review.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This review calls attention to the misinformation relating to COVID-19 vaccination with supposed endocrine effects such as infertility and 
problems with pregnancy. Rebutting these misconceptions can help increase compliance and maximize COVID-19 vaccination to the public.

This review is scientific with a lot of information from other references. 

It has a lot of studies and case reports to describe the field of the article. The work is well organized and comprehensively described.

Author Response

Please see the attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript by Mirza et al., was a relatively comprehensive research article on the potential effect of the viral infection and vaccination. The authors focused on the SARS-CoV-2 progression and treatment. Investigations were well performed, and language was well written. There were some moderate concerns:

• The sex functions were summarized (such as in Lines 174-176), but the biological sex differences need to be described.
• Figures should be updated with molecular and cellular mechanisms.
• In Section “Misinformation”in Pages 9-10, the potential issues and research aspects should be summarized in a table.

Author Response

Please see the attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx