Next Article in Journal
Long-Term Outcomes after Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Dilated vs. Ischemic Cardiomyopathy
Previous Article in Journal
[18F]Fluoride Positron-Emission Tomography (PET) and [18F]FDG PET for Assessment of Osteomyelitis of the Jaw in Comparison to Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): A Prospective PET/CT and PET/MRI Pilot Study
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Fatigue Assessment Scale in Caregivers of Palliative Care Patients

J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(14), 3999; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11143999
by Ana A. Esteban-Burgos 1,2, Manuel Fernández-Alcántara 2,*, Silvia Escribano 3, Juana Perpiñá-Galvañ 3, Concepción Petra Campos-Calderón 4 and María José Cabañero-Martínez 3
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(14), 3999; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11143999
Submission received: 10 June 2022 / Revised: 1 July 2022 / Accepted: 8 July 2022 / Published: 11 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Mental Health)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is relevant for the field and examines an important topic and population group. The Spanish version of the FAS could be useful for future research.

The manuscript is well presented.

 But check:

1.      the lines 107-108: „Likert scale…  2=almost always“ or it should be 5? Similar lines 112-113:  Scale 1-5 or 1-7?

2.     Table 2: “Consistencia interna” this has to be in English?

 

The study design is appropriate and the details given in the methods section are consistent and clear.

The results are easy to understand and the conclusions consistent with the presented evidence

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

We want to thank your thoughtful reading, your effort, suggestions and quick response. 

Please, find attached a document with the changes we made according to your suggestions. 

Best regards, 

The Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear researcher(s), you are addressing an important and meaningful gap. Your paper is well-written and it has some important results, and if you edit your paper it can be much more effective. Here some humble suggestions to improve the paper, I would do the following to strengthen the paper. please see attached review. 

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

We want to thank your thoughtful reading, your effort, suggestions and quick response. 

Please, find attached a document with the changes we made according to your suggestions. 

Best regards, 

The Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop