Next Article in Journal
An Unsupervised Approach to Structuring and Analyzing Repetitive Semantic Structures in Free Text of Electronic Medical Records
Previous Article in Journal
Intersections between Copper, β-Arrestin-1, Calcium, FBXW7, CD17, Insulin Resistance and Atherogenicity Mediate Depression and Anxiety Due to Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Nomothetic Network Approach
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

COVID-19 Follow-App. Mobile App-Based Monitoring of COVID-19 Patients after Hospital Discharge: A Single-Center, Open-Label, Randomized Clinical Trial

J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12(1), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010024
by Ester Marquez-Algaba 1,*, Marc Sanchez 1, Maria Baladas 2, Claudia España 3, Hermes Salvatore Dallo 3, Manuel Requena 2, Ariadna Torrella 1, Bibiana Planas 1, Berta Raventos 1, Carlos Molina 2, Marc Ribo 2, Benito Almirante 1,4 and Oscar Len 1,4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12(1), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010024
Submission received: 25 November 2021 / Revised: 10 December 2021 / Accepted: 17 December 2021 / Published: 1 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Topic eHealth and mHealth: Challenges and Prospects)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This Covid-19 Follow-App trial is a single-center, open-label, randomized clinical trial in Barcelona, Spain and demonstrates the usefulness of an App-approach in the follow up of Covid 19 patients. Interestingly, both in-person return visits and return phone visits were 0 in the intervention group. Since patient satisfaction and perception of health were not different between the groups, the quality of standard care might have played a role. This could be discussed in more detail.

Author Response

We agree with the reviewer so we have changed the discussion accordingly. The modified text would be:

Discussion:

Interestingly, despite the fact that the control group needed to consult with emergency services after discharge more frequently, satisfaction and perception of health were not significantly different between the groups. In general terms, all patients were satisfied with the quality of care during hospitalization and were very grateful for the enormous effort made by primary care to perform the control telephone call.

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a solution for Mobile App-Based Monitoring of Covid-19 Patients after the treatment. The paper is well written but has some flaws.
Firstly, the premise of the problem is not very clear.

  • How this app helps keeping patients at home? It is a monitoring app after hospital visit, that means patients are already treated and needs less monitoring. Then why we need this app?
  • How this app helps in contact tracing? 
  • Also some studies shows that certain group (age 18-40) of patients develop immunity after exposure to the infection, is there a need to trace those patients?

Secondly, the app was used for stroke patients, as claimed in the paper. COVID and stroke patients are two entirely different groups. stroke patients are not contagious but other group is. So , how we can use the same app?

Finally, after exposure to the COVID infection generally patients are more cautious and careful. So, what is the nature of follow up and why its required is not clear. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This study investigates mobile app-based monitoring of covid-19 patients after hospital discharge. I should appreciate the authors' time and patient to come up with some results. However, there are still several problems that deduct from the quality of this manuscript. Below are several comments on this work.

  1. Please replace the Gmail address with your affiliation email.
  2. I can not find Figures 1 and 2 mentioned in your manuscript.
  3. The sample size is insufficient. In addition, the patient satisfaction might vary from one hospital to another.
  4. Did you classify the patients according to the severity of their symptoms?
  5. The authors should proofread the English writing to improve the study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed my concerns.
The paper can be accepted in current form.

Reviewer 3 Report

No comments.

Back to TopTop