Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Routine Immunization Programs in Northern Nigeria

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is very extensive and deals with a subject that is not new to the area. Obviously, a Covid-19 pandemic has had an impact on immunization programs around the world.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your positive feedback on our paper. The authors deeply appreciate your effort in reviewing our work.

We have carefully considered the feedback provided by other reviewers during our review process.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations on the relevance of the topic under study. 

I consider that the title is not in line with the purpose of the study. I suggest the following title:  Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine immunization programs in Northern Nigeria. 

The abstract should mention the type of study. It is not clear who the sample under study is. What are the implications for practice?

The introduction has an inordinate number of sections. You can add some of the sections in order to make the article clearer to read. 

The concept " routine immunization programs" is very relevant, and is not clarified in the introduction.

Who are the participants in the study? Can you clarify the sampling process and how you arrived at the data? how is the data collection instrument operationalized? was the instrument built just for this study? Was the data collection retrospective? The whole methodological component is confusing. What good practice guide for research was used? Where is the qualitative component of the study? In open-ended questions in the questionnaire? what were these questions? how many responses? how were the data analyzed?

They start the discussion with a concept "resilience" that you don't understand why it appears at this point. Does it result from this study? From this data? The discussion should be reworded in light of the results of this study. 

Author Response

The authors are grateful for the time you committed to review our manuscript. 

We have addressed the concerns you raised and have made direct edits to the manuscripts to capture your suggestions. In the cases of clarifications, we have made them on the response documents attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper and the research it reports appear reasonably well done. Here are some items to attend to in a revision.

First, the paper uses a lot of acronyms, so include a table close to the front of the paper that defines all of the acronyms in the paper.

Second, Table 1 needs a note at the bottom defining what * and ** reference. I know that these are the usual levels of statistical significance, but this needs to be stated clearly.

Third, the brief paragraph describing Figure 6 could be usefully elaborated somewhat to emphasize its substance for readers.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your positive feedback on our paper. The authors deeply appreciate your effort in reviewing our work.

All your suggestions have been taken into consideration and the appropriate corrections effected where necessary.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors responded to most requests for change.

Congratulations