Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overall, the ms is nicely written and informative.

References are particularly timely; congrats on you!

Abstract: “significant role of media in health communication and education….”, ok, but in which direction? 

Text: “This aims to challenge global challenges to…”; while the sentence is not wrong, think about: “…aims to trial the global …”

“… Schizophrenia, Bipolar…” are capital letters necessary?

Population size and psychiatrists; the reader would highly benefit from an easy-to-accomplish ratio calculation.

While this is often a question of taste and judgement, I suggest to avoiding expressions such as grim. Such specifiers are rather discouraged in the context of scientific writing.

Overall, the Introduction section is nicely written and the reader benefits from a comprehensive and timely description of the state-of-the-art. 

Method section. Nicely done. 

Results: “… After a group of student participants (89 from two schools engaged in an 8-to-10-week psychoeducational… “; is it possible that font or space or both changed?

“There was a significant difference observed between participants/audiences and non-audiences (p= 0.013, p= 0.001, respectively) (Saei et al., 2021). This suggests an…”; if possible, please calculate the effect sizes (Cohen, 1988, 1992; Cohen, 1994) and add these statistical information to the text. See alto Till et al 2018 in your text, where p-values are significant, though Cohen’s d effect sizes were trivial to medium. 

Discussion: While this is often a question of taste and judgement, compared to the Introduction section, the Discussion section should be enlarged. 

Limitations and conclusions: Pay attention to the formatting. 

 

References

Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah NJ.

Cohen, J., 1992. A power primer. Psychol Bull 112(1), 155-159.

Cohen, J., 1994. The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist 49(12), 997-1003.

 

Author Response

Thank you so much for your time and effort. We have now revised our manuscript accordingly. 

Your comments have helped us to rethink and review this paper. The issue of capitalisation has now been resolved. Thank you.

Corrections are all highlighted in colour. Thank you so much.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. There is some merit in the idea however, in order for the manuscript to be acceptable it needs substantial revisions.

The major revisions are within the introduction, the methods, results and the discussion.

Introduction: There is a weak argument presented for the use of mass media and social media and this needs to be strengthened. Several of the paragraphs need to be linked to each other.

Methods: What method was used to develop this review, what informed this review for example did you follow Arskey and O'Malley's method? The authors need to align the aims of the literature review with the research questions more clearly.

Results: Several assumptions are made which need to be reviewed such as self compassion interventions will be effective in supporting Nigerian youth who are suicidal due to negative life events? The original study was conducted on white females within the USA?? 

Discussion: The discussion and conclusions and limitation needs substantial revisions and the new material introduced within the discussion might be best placed in the introduction. 

 

The PRISMA Chart needs revision and there needs to be an explanation for the exclusion of articles. 

Author Response

Thank you so much for your time and effort. We have now revised our manuscript accordingly. 

Your comments have helped us to rethink and review this paper. The methods and discussion sections have now been revised. Thank you.

Corrections are all highlighted in colour. 

Thank you so much.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is relevant to African countries and does add to the literature in the area. There needs to be better integration of the findings within the discussion area and the Prisma Chart needs to include by articles were excluded. 

The table needs to have Table 1 in the heading which should appear at the head and not at the bottom of the table. 

Author Response

Thank you so much for your time and feedback. We have now revised our manuscript accordingly. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have managed to respond to the critical evaluation and the manuscript is now much improved. However there are a number of comments at the side that need to be addressed?

I would appear that there are a number of comments at the side that need to be addressed?

Author Response

Dear esteemed Reviewer,

Please, kindly consider this file.

Thank you so much for your understanding.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf