Citizen Science Studies in Nursing: A Systematic Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents an interesting and relevant topic. However, it suffers from several drawbacks that need to be corrected before its possible acceptance.

- The abstract needs to be rewritten, especially clarify the results.

- I advise the authors to professionally proofread their manuscript prior to resubmitting.

- Introduction is very short and weak. Needs more problematization 

- Methods chapter is weak, needs more specification of empirical work. 

- A literature review section is very good.

- Atention to "Error! Reference source not found. "  in the text - example line 253

 

Author Response

Below I attach a document with the responses to your notes. Thank you very much for your suggestions. We are at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for an interesting study. In the field of nursing, the Citizen Science seemed to of importance.

 I would like to make comments with an ambition to improve the paper.

 Background:

Can the knowledge gap be highlighted more clearly in the background?

Consider clarifying the concept and related concept more deeply.

 Do you have any research questions related to your aim? Please clarify.

 

Methods:

Consider clarifying the study design under a separate heading at the beginning of the method.

Page 2, line 83- A systematic review is conducted, do you mean” was conducted”?

Overall, the method section is perceived as a bit difficult to follow as a reader. It is possible to clarify.

How has the data collection and searches been carried out? Were there several people who searched for articles, and how did this process work? Is it possible to clarify?

Figure 1. What do you mean with “Reports of included studies”? And n=0?

Isn't it enough to write that included studies were n= 13?

 

Results:

Is it possible to clarify Table 1? And include the criteria above in the Table? Or is 1,2,3... Studies? (Authors and years)?

Maybe it would be good if Table 3, and its text is in English? Will be a bit strange if it's mixed in the article.

 

Discussion:

Should the discussion section be written out more clearly with a heading?

And clarify the method and the result discussion more clearly.

Consider discussing and highlight the generalizability of your study/review for an international readership. And your findings.

Consider discussing your approach further, as well as your strengths and weaknesses.

Author Response

Below I attach a document with the responses to your notes. Thank you very much for your suggestions. We are at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. I recommend the following:

2. It seems references or figures mentioned as "Error! Reference source not found." were intended to be included but are missing. I would recommend thoroughly reviewing the manuscript to make sure all intended references and figures are correctly inserted and cited.

3. Please ensure that the terminology used is consistent to help the reader understand, especially given the diverse audience that might engage with this review.

4.  

5. While the article mentions the use of mobile applications, further elucidation on how these tools enhance or limit citizen participation could provide deeper insights into their applicability and effectiveness in nursing research.

6.  

7. Given the participatory nature of citizen science, elaborating on ethical considerations, data privacy, and potentially sensitive health information management could strengthen the review's comprehensiveness.

8.  

9. While the article briefly touches upon the potential of citizen science in nursing, a more detailed discussion on anticipated challenges and opportunities for integrating citizen science in future nursing research would be beneficial.

Consider an expanded conclusion that integrates the recommendations for future research, highlights the significance of your findings, and underscores the potential impact of citizen science in nursing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I recommend translating the headers and content of Table 3 from Spanish to English, ensuring consistency with the rest of the document.

Author Response

Below I attach a document with the responses to your notes. Thank you very much for your suggestions. We are at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My questions have been answered and clarified.