Next Article in Journal
Numerical Study of a Miniaturized, 1–3 Piezoelectric Composite Focused Ultrasound Transducer
Next Article in Special Issue
Ameliorative Effect of Omega-3-Rich Fish Diet on the Neurotoxic Effects of Propionic Acid in a Rodent Model of Autism
Previous Article in Journal
Wall Shear Stress Measurement in Carotid Artery Phantoms with Variation in Degree of Stenosis Using Plane Wave Vector Doppler
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

A Review of the Relationship between Gut Microbiome and Obesity

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(1), 610; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010610
by Dorottya Zsálig 1,*, Anikó Berta 2, Vivien Tóth 3,4, Zoltán Szabó 4, Klára Simon 1, Mária Figler 4,5, Henriette Pusztafalvi 6 and Éva Polyák 4
Reviewer 2:
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(1), 610; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010610
Submission received: 23 November 2022 / Revised: 22 December 2022 / Accepted: 30 December 2022 / Published: 2 January 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.      In this review article, the relationship between obesity and body microbiota is discussed. There are many similar reviews in this field. Therefore, the authors should mention the innovation of this study compared to previous studies.

2.      It is better the authors briefly discuss the relationship between microbiota and metabolic disorders and other diseases in the introduction.

3.      mechanisms by which the gut microbiota may impact obesity should be discussed in a distinct subtitle.

4.       Manipulation of the gut microbiota for decreasing obesity should be discussed in a distinct subtitle.

5.       The English language of the article should be improved.

Author Response

Dear reviewer!
The responses are uploaded in the following word document.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The work by Zsálig and colleagues summarizes an interesting clinical topic. It is very well written, and I only have a few minor remarks regarding language. Please find these and some other minor remarks in the PDF document.

My major concern is that the selection criteria of studies (in the tables and text) are not clear and appear to be random / incomplete.

1. The authors should state in the article on what basis they selected the included studies.

2. The authors should include more up-to-date studies (especially in Table 2). E.g. there are many important studies on dietary fibres and complex carbohydrates from the last 5 years. The ones in the article are from 2012, 2011, and 2019.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer!
The responses are uploaded in the following word document

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

None

Back to TopTop