Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors

I appreciated a lot the review of your critical work. It is an essential analysis of the development of palliative care in Portugal.

However, I have some considerations about your manuscript:

1) The term "technicians" is not appropriate. I suggest the replacement with "health professionals";
2) Your statement in line 44 is not understandable. Why and how can palliative care reduce cancer in 2025?
3) The palliative care definition (line 68; reference 10) is inadequate. It is an old definition that is similar to the 2002 WHO definition. You can access the primary source, so the definition must be replaced;
4) In Figure 1, you used terms in Portuguese and English. All must be in English.
5) In line 285, you wrote that progress cannot be made without education in PC. I suggest including not only the development but also the quality of the care and outcomes;
6) In the discussion I suggest the comparison with the document of Gómez-Batiste et al. "Building_Integrated_Palliative_Care_Programs_and_Services._2017", that goes attached 

Nice Job

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer

I appreciated a lot the review of your critical work. It is an essential analysis of the development of palliative care in Portugal.

However, I have some considerations about your manuscript:

• The term "technicians" is not appropriate. I suggest the replacement with "health professionals";
  1. Accepted; Changed.
• Your statement in line 44 is not understandable. Why and how can palliative care reduce cancer in 2025?
  1. Accepted; Replaced for ‘Control’
• The palliative care definition (line 68; reference 10) is inadequate. It is an old definition that is similar to the 2002 WHO definition. You can access the primary source, so the definition must be replaced;
  1. Accepted; Replaced.
• In Figure 1, you used terms in Portuguese and English. All must be in English.
  1. Accepted; Adjusted.
• In line 285, you wrote that progress cannot be made without education in PC. I suggest including not only the development but also the quality of the care and outcomes;
  1. Accepted; Included.
• In the discussion I suggest the comparison with the document of Gómez-Batiste et al. "Building_Integrated_Palliative_Care_Programs_and_Services._2017", that goes attached 
  1. Accepted; Included.

Thanks,

Paulo Marques

Reviewer 2 Report

The structure of the article appears somewhat disorganized, making it difficult to discern clear thematic and logical relationships between sections and paragraphs. It is advisable to reorganize the article to ensure that each section has a well-defined theme and logical sequence. While the article mentions some data and viewpoints, it does not provide sufficient specific information or citations to support these viewpoints. Please include references. In the conclusion section, provide a more explicit summary that highlights the significant findings and recommendations of the study.

The structure of the article appears somewhat disorganized, making it difficult to discern clear thematic and logical relationships between sections and paragraphs. It is advisable to reorganize the article to ensure that each section has a well-defined theme and logical sequence. While the article mentions some data and viewpoints, it does not provide sufficient specific information or citations to support these viewpoints. Please include references. In the conclusion section, provide a more explicit summary that highlights the significant findings and recommendations of the study.

Author Response

We consider that the changes made respond to the essential aspects listed, namely with the addition of important references and recommendations resulting from the study.