Next Article in Journal
Standardization as a Catalyst for Open and Responsible Innovation
Previous Article in Journal
The Role of Consumer and Customer Journeys in Customer Experience Driven and Open Innovation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Open Business Model of COVID-19 Transformation of an Urban Public Transport System: The Experience of a Large Russian City
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Decentralized Open Platform for Vaccination—A German Example: COVID-19-Vacc

J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7(3), 186; https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030186
by Mirjana Radonjic-Simic 1,*, Christian Mahrt 2, Sven Niemand 2, Andreas Speck 2 and Melanie Windrich 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7(3), 186; https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030186
Submission received: 28 June 2021 / Revised: 6 August 2021 / Accepted: 6 August 2021 / Published: 11 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Global Challenges of Digital Transformation of Markets (GDTM-2020))

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper should be considered a "milestone" to follow for an important improvement  to have a complete COVID 19 of all people in the world. My observation is relative to the use of App devices in older population and the authors should better develop this point

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you very much for your positive feedback. 

 

Together with the comments of another reviewer, we have changed our manuscript. Changes refer in particular to Sections 1. Introduction, 2. Background, and 3. Related Work and Approach as well as 6. Discussion.  

We have attached the new version of our manuscript – changes are highlighted in blue.  

About your comments “My observation is relative to the use of App devices in older population and the authors should better develop this point.”

This is a valid comment, which we will consider as a part of our future work, where we will implement our platform model, including Apps or Interfaces for particular user groups. In addition, we could already gather some experience in the inclusion of elderly and disabled people regarding information technology in the project "Vernetzt!" (“Connected!” Engl. ). More details (unfortunately only in German) can be found here:
https://ibaf.de/projekt-innovation/erfolgreich-abgeschlossene-projekte/projekt-vernetzt/. 

For this paper we added a paragraph which clarifies, that the use of our platform is optional for the individuals and therefore older people do not need to use any App.

 

Yours Sincerely 

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

COVID-19-Vacc: the German Example of an Open Decentralized Platform to support Vaccination Strategies

This article proposes the COVID-19-Vacc Platform – an open and decentralized digital platform focused on vaccinations in Germany. Overall, this article is well-written and well-organized. The figures are appropriate and meaningful. I do not have any major comments. However, I have a few suggestions that can improve the quality of the manuscript.

  • I encourage the authors to add more references because there are so many studies regarding the COVID-19 in general and COVID-19 vaccines in particular. Engaging with existing studies may demonstrate that this study builds on (e.g. extends and/or challenges) the previous work.
  • Please provide more rationale (e.g. citations and/or examples) about the vaccination and vaccination strategies in general. Why should citizens or government concern this? (in the introduction or section 2)
  • Please provide a short literature review (e.g. one or two paragraphs) about vaccine developments during the COVID-19 (introduction or section 2)
  • Before the Section 2.1, the authors may add a paragraph about COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy globally (before Germany). They do not need to provide too much information about all/most countries but providing a few examples from pioneering countries or some developments would be appropriate.
  • Before section 6.1 (Facilitating decentralization and openness (Objective 1)), it would be great if the authors provide one paragraph summary of the previous sections.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you very much for your valuable feedback, based upon which we revised our manuscript. 

We have addressed most of your suggestions by adding additional references and more details related to commented statements. Our changes refer in particular to Sections 1. Introduction, 2. Background, and 3. Related Work and Approach, 5.1.3 Ecosystem as well as 6. Discussion. 

We have attached the new version of our manuscript – changes are highlighted in blue.  

About your comments: “I encourage the authors to add more references because there are so many studies regarding the COVID-19 in general and COVID-19 vaccines in particular. Engaging with existing studies may demonstrate that this study builds on (e.g. extends and/or challenges) the previous work. Please provide a short literature review (e.g. one or two paragraphs) about vaccine developments during the COVID-19 (introduction or section 2).”

These are very valid comments, and we have also thought about these from the very beginning of our manuscript. However, we have omitted any medical details about the COVID-19 virus and related vaccine development, as we have focused on the platform's organizational aspects (i.e., decentralization and openness) and the underlying software architecture required to support the proposed solution platform model. Chapter 3 (Related Work and Approach) has added new references on how our model differs from others currently used in the COVID-19 context. As part of our future work, we will prototype our platform model, thereby considering integrating the aspects of vaccination development as a possible “pre-phase” of the vaccination process covered by the platform's service stack.                  

Yours Sincerely 

Authors

 

Back to TopTop