M-Healthcare Model: An Architecture for a Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Mobile Application
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Congratulations about your work, I have some constructive feedback:
- Comment 1: Lines 27 -38. When describing T2 and T1 DM, by reading these lines I see same information but described twice differently, I wonder if maybe by resuming this lines in one way of saying same informaiton might sound clearer?
- Comment 2: Lines 40 - 50. When describing control and self-control habits / management, same comment as in Comment 1.
- Comment 3. Lines 112 - 113: When talking about Telehealth and Telemedicine: "...TAs a part of Telehealth, Telemedicine focuses on the therapeutic side, while telemedicine covers the prophylactic, preventive, and therapeutic aspects...". Would you meant Telemedicine and Telehealth, instead of telemendicine and telemedicine?
Author Response
|
No |
Reviewer |
Comment |
Checklist |
|
1 |
1 |
Lines 27 -38. When describing T2 and T1 DM, by reading these lines I see same information but described twice differently, I wonder if maybe by resuming this lines in one way of saying same informaiton might sound clearer? |
Lines 27-38 Described definitions of T1 and T2 from different Researchers, some researchers gave a similar definition. |
|
2 |
1 |
Lines 40 - 50. When describing control and self-control habits / management, same comment as in Comment 1. |
Lines 27-38 Described definitions of T1 and T2 from different Researchers, some researchers gave a similar definition. |
|
3 |
1 |
Lines 112 - 113: When talking about Telehealth and Telemedicine: "...TAs a part of Telehealth, Telemedicine focuses on the therapeutic side, while telemedicine covers the prophylactic, preventive, and therapeutic aspects...". Would you meant Telemedicine and Telehealth, instead of telemendicine and telemedicine? |
I updated the Paragraph, what I mean is Telecare as a part of Telehealth and Telemedicine focus on, etc. |
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, the authors claimed that "Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a metabolic disorder where in the case of Type 2 diabetes the patients require DM management to keep blood glucose under control properly and regularly. Control of diabetes mellitus can be done with support through the use of technology, one of which is Mobile Health". Therefore, they proposed developing an architecture for mobile applications for type-2 diabetic monitoring.
In the reviewer's opinion, this work is very attractive and topical, however, it should be major revised, as follows:
1) In Section 1 is presented quite rigidly, the authors go directly into the concept of Diabetes Mellitus (1.1) without mentioning and emphasis the smart healthcare systems forming context, architecture, support technologies, visions and challenges, thereby highlighting the research issue and its contributions. These issues are shown in the recent study: Smart Healthcare IoT Applications based on Fog Computing: Architecture, Applications and Challenges.
2) Table 1 should be reformatted. The cited references in the title of Table 1 should be removed. Similarly to all other tables.
3) In line 72 and In Table 4, the authors claimed that "Previous researchers have conducted preliminary research through two previous studies (Table 4)". If only aim to present these two studies, the authors should remove Table 4, and then, indicate the cited two studies in References.
5) The Classification in Table 5 does not means, "Enterprise Software", "Product Development Software", and "Media and Entertainment Software" is similar. The authors should lassification based on real-time/emergency/disease prediction/ physical activities/ sport and gym, etc.
6) Fig. 1 is an error, all Figures should be enhanced with the minimum resolution of 300 dpi.
7) In Section 4 (Proposed Architecture), the authors should mention some concepts such as Medical Sensor and Exercise Equipment; Transmission and Information. I recommend the authors re-present these problems such as the challenges of M-health (healthcare). The authors should refer to challenges and communication technologies in 5G in Wireless Communication Technologies for IoT in 5G: Vision, Applications, and Challenges to extend issues.
8) Figures 3 & 4 are very small, it is difficult for readers.
9) Conclusion should be rewritten to highlight the contributions of this paper.
Author Response
|
No |
Reviewer |
Comment |
Checklist |
|
1 |
2 |
1) In Section 1 is presented quite rigidly, the authors go directly into the concept of Diabetes Mellitus (1.1) without mentioning and emphasis the smart healthcare systems forming context, architecture, support technologies, visions and challenges, thereby highlighting the research issue and its contributions. These issues are shown in the recent study: Smart Healthcare IoT Applications based on Fog Computing: Architecture, Applications and Challenges. |
Updated 1.1. Smart Healthcare Systems |
|
2 |
2 |
2) Table 1 should be reformatted. The cited references in the title of Table 1 should be removed. Similarly to all other tables. |
Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 |
|
3 |
2 |
3) In line 72 and In Table 4, the authors claimed that "Previous researchers have conducted preliminary research through two previous studies (Table 4)". If only aim to present these two studies, the authors should remove Table 4, and then, indicate the cited two studies in References. |
Updated 1.4 Previous Research |
|
4 |
2 |
5) The Classification in Table 5 does not means, "Enterprise Software", "Product Development Software", and "Media and Entertainment Software" is similar. The authors should classification based on real-time/emergency/disease prediction/ physical activities/ sport and gym, etc. |
Table 5 Focused on five classifications of HealtH Application: 1. Disease Prediction, 2. Clinical Communication, 3. Medication, 4. Exercise, 5. nutrition |
|
5 |
2 |
6) Fig. 1 is an error, all Figures should be enhanced with the minimum resolution of 300 dpi. |
Already Updated Figure 3 |
|
6 |
2 |
7) In Section 4 (Proposed Architecture), the authors should mention some concepts such as Medical Sensor and Exercise Equipment; Transmission and Information. I recommend the authors re-present these problems such as the challenges of M-health (healthcare). The authors should refer to challenges and communication technologies in 5G in Wireless Communication Technologies for IoT in 5G: Vision, Applications, and Challenges to extend issues. |
In this Research We just Tested the App with Glucometer and Wearable Band. We don’t have any testing to be and evidence to explain related the challenges in 5G Technologies. |
|
7 |
2 |
8) Figures 3 & 4 are very small, it is difficult for readers |
Already rotate figure 5 and make it large also with figure 6 (Updated Figure 5 and 6) |
|
8 |
2 |
9) Conclusion should be rewritten to highlight the contributions of this paper. |
Updated |
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The author's contribution is not highlighted in the abstract section
In the introduction section, what is the author's major contribution? Justify it
What is the authors' involvement in Figure 1. Scope of Telehealth Terminology [5].
Figure 1. is repeated. Which one is Figure 1 ?
This paper technically not sound
Author Response
|
No |
Reviewer |
Comment |
Checklist |
|
1 |
3 |
The author's contribution is not highlighted in the abstract section |
Updated |
|
2 |
|
In the introduction section, what is the author's major contribution? Justify it |
In the introduction, we mentioned about 1.4 Previous Research. In this section, we describe our scope and contribution since the first project started. |
|
3 |
|
What is the authors' involvement in Figure 1. Scope of Telehealth Terminology [5]. |
Our Research is About M-Health where e-health, telehealth, telemedicine, and telecare as a part of M-Health |
|
4 |
|
Figure 1. is repeated. Which one is Figure 1 ? |
Different Figure, I did a mistake in Numbering |
|
|
|
This paper technically not sound |
The focus of this research is actually on the design architecture, the deep discussion technically been deeply discussed in 1.4 Previous Research |
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for your reply.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1
Point 1: English language and style are fine/minor spell check required Response 1: The article manuscript has been checked for grammar by Prof. Dr. Tini Mogea from Manado State University (Professor of English Literature and English Education) E-mail: tinimogea@unima.ac.id
Point 2: Are the results clearly presented
Response 2: New Section "5. Testing"
Table 8. Testing Factors.
Figure 9. User Acceptance Testing for Mobile application
Note:
Note (Previous Development):
2021: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/5/2006,
2021: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/15/1820
Current Project (Diabetes Mobile App and Smart Plate) Next project we will integrate all of this project to help Patients:
Mobile Application: https://github.com/wasim-abbas/Diabetes-Managment-System
Smart Plate: https://github.com/ssh5212/smart-plate
Number of Diabetes Patients in Research:
2021: 20 Patients
2022: 40 Patients
Ongoing: 60-80 Patients
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This version is significantly improved compared to the original manuscript. In my opinion, it is eligible for publishing.
A minor revision should be performed is arrange references from low to high according to the content of the paper.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2
Point 1: I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style
Response 1: The article manuscript has been checked for grammar by Prof. Dr. Tini Mogea from Manado State University (Professor of English Literature and English Education) E-mail: tinimogea@unima.ac.id
Point 2: A minor revision should be performed is arrange references from low to high according to the content of the paper.
Response 2: Updated using MDPI Format: https://mdpi-res.com/data/mdpi_references_guide_v5.pdf
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The introduction doesn't provide sufficient background and includes all relevant references. Expected the recent literature.
Table.7 ,there are lot of images are there but not numbered ,even not cited in the text .
The author mentioned as 1.4. Previous Research but which research about to discuss ? Its completely hidden . However only theoritical comparision presented in Table.4
Expected comparison from experimental observation ratherthan theoritical prospective
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3
Point 1: Moderate English changes required
Response 1: The article manuscript has been checked for grammar by Prof. Dr. Tini Mogea from Manado State University (Professor of English Literature and English Education) E-mail: tinimogea@unima.ac.id
Point 2: The introduction doesn't provide sufficient background and includes all relevant references. Expected the recent literature.
Response 2: Introduction Section already change from the comment of Reviewer 2 Point 1 and I followed the recommendation/ suggested Journal to be added (Review Report Round 1)
Point 3: Table.7 ,there are lot of images are there but not numbered ,even not cited in the text .
Response 3: This is our own application, we don’t take this from others. Table 7 is about the explanation about our mobile application page
Note: Updated the Table
Point 4: The author mentioned as 1.4. Previous Research but which research about to discuss ? Its completely hidden . However only theoritical comparision presented in Table.4
Response 4: Table 4. Updated to Table 4. Comparison our Previous Work
Our Project:
1. Mobile App: https://github.com/wasim-abbas/Diabetes-Managment-System
2. Smart Plate: https://github.com/ssh5212/smart-plate
Point 5: Expected comparison from experimental observation ratherthan theoritical prospective
Response 5: New Section 5. Testing
Table 8. Testing Factors.
Figure 9. User Acceptance Testing for Mobile application
Note:
Note (Previous Development):
2021: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/5/2006,
2021: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/15/1820
Current Project (Diabetes Mobile App and Smart Plate) Next project we will integrate all of this project to help Patients:
Mobile Application: https://github.com/wasim-abbas/Diabetes-Managment-System
Smart Plate: https://github.com/ssh5212/smart-plate
Number of Diabetes Patients in Research:
2021: 20 Patients
2022: 40 Patients
Ongoing: 60-80 Patients
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
