Predictor Variables of Mental Health in Spanish University Students

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Could “young”of "young university students" in the title be removed ?

2. Please clearly demonstrate the innovation and contribution of this research relative to the existing research.

3. Only generally studying the predictors of university students' mental health seems lack depth in the research. It is hoped that one or two of the predictors can be selected as independent variables, and the remaining variables can be used as control variables to further explore the influence of independent variables on dependent variables when relevant variables are controlled.

4. The literature review should also focus on the existing research on the relationship between independent variables and dependent variables, so as to present the innovative contribution of this research.

Author Response

Answer to editor and reviewers

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for submitting your paper for review and for conducting the study.

The study aims to analyze whether happiness, commitment, affection, life satisfaction and health perception are predictive variables of the risk of mental health disorders. It is based on the idea that university students have a high risk of suffering from mental health disorders, and positive affects, negative affects, academic commitment, life satisfaction, health perception and happiness predict this. risk.

 

1. The topic is relevant from an educational, social and health point of view. The studies reviewed are consistent with the stated objective. The objective is clear and precise.

2. The methodology and statistical analyzes are fit for purpose.

The evaluation instruments are sufficiently described.

In the procedure section, it must be specified that the study was carried out in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki.

3. Regarding the presentation of results, it is proposed to insert Tables 3 and 4 after commenting on the data analyzed.

4. In the Discussion section, the authors are proposed to start from the main objective of the study, before commenting on the results. The relevance of the identified predictors can be highlighted.

Regarding the limitations of the study, it should be noted that the research focuses on science students.

In the last paragraph of the conclusion, “suggestions noted above to improve future intervention proposals” should note that this article studies associations without temporal design, and that it cannot control for many important factors as discussed in the review.

Regarding formal aspects, an excessive use of italics (italics) appears throughout the manuscript. It is suggested to remove these italics and replace them with normal text.

5. Some errors are noted in the References section. Authors need to check references.

Thank you very much, and good luck!!!

Author Response

Answer editor  and reviewers

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1. The title can be mor specific, such as the nationality of the participants
2. Please briefly describe the background of the study in the abstract.
3. The description of the Introduction is too long, please make it concise and focus on the introduction of the research gap.
4. In the Introduction, the theoretical framework should be stated and the relevance of the theory to the variables should be introduced.
5. It is suggested to add a chapter to introduce the research questions and research hypotheses in detail.
6. It is recommended that Procedure be moved to the front of Participants. and add the sampling method of the study in this paragraph.
7. Please provide additional information on the representation of Participants.
8. The research discussion should include subheadings discussing the results and prior studies.
9. Please move the study limitations to the Conclusions.
10. Please include subheadings in conclusion providing theoretical and practical implications.
11. Overall, it is not possible to understand the innovation of this study, which would be the biggest drawback of this study, please highlight it in the full text.

Author Response

Answer to editor and reviewers

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Only generally studying the predictors of university students' mental health seems lack depth in the research. It is hoped that, in future study, one or two of the predictors can be selected as independent variables, and the remaining variables can be used as control variables to further explore the influence of independent variables on dependent variables when relevant variables are controlled.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

You have revised the manuscript and has improved significantly, so I will suggest editor that it can be accepted this revision.