Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

2. Materials and Methods:

Information on Ethical considerations is missing

3. Results:

In Table 1 on Victimization, the name of the columns should be Victims not Perpetrators.

In table 2, replace Física with Physical

In Table 2, it is not known which part is for Residential Care and which is for School Centers

4. Discussion:

It is worth explaining in the discussion why in Residential Care the rates of violence among girls and boys are similar and in School Centers boys are definitely predominant. How to understand this?

There is a need to broaden the discussion about the differences between boys and girls of DV.

5. Conclusions: all content should be moved to 4. Discussion, as it contains a discussion of the results.

    5. Conclusions: should be written.

Author Response

Please see the attachment, thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript addresses a very relevant and subject topic: dating violence and focus adolescents in residential care, a sample that are less studied. This is a very important and timely subject and is a potentially significant contribution to our field. However, there are some aspects that could be improved in the paper

• the title should reflect not only the theme but also the sample considered and that this is a comparative study;
• the introduction lacks some bibliographic update, and there are more recent studies that should be cited in terms of prevalence studies; authors should avoid using the term "recent studies" when citing a 2017 study that is already 4 years old;
• the specific objectives must be presented and considering the previous existence of several studies on the subject, consider including the research hypotheses;
• The procedures need to be better explained, mainly because the sample involves participants under the age of 18. Nothing is said about informed consent, which needs to be clarified as it was collected;
• Also include a section with the data analysis performed;
• The tables lack the legend related to the level of significance
• The discussion and conclusion sections should be revised as the conclusion is more focused on the discussion of results. it is therefore suggested that the conclusion is more focused on indicating the main results of the study, as well as on its limitations and practical implications of the studies.
• Results related to gender differences need further exploration and reflection.
• Likewise, the author should provide further exploration of the high indicators of victimization and perpetration among the sample of adolescents in residential care

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment, thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Many of my comments made in the first review were not considered, namely:

the specific objectives must be presented and considering the previous existence of several studies on the subject, consider including the research hypotheses;
 The procedures need to be better explained, mainly because the sample involves participants under the age of 18. Nothing is said about informed consent, which needs tobe clarified as it was collected;
 Also include a section with the data analysis performed;
 Results related to gender differences need further exploration and reflection.
 Likewise, the author should provide further exploration of the high indicators of victimization and perpetration among the sample of adolescents in residential care.

Author Response

Good afternoon,
Thank you for your contributions.
I have tried to respond to the comments and have also noted other changes to the manuscript.

Thank you very much,

Maria

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

I believe the work has been improved and is now in a position to be published.