All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
You have addressed all the queries raised by the reviewers.
Include a diagram to show different methods and techniques used in each stage.
Reviewer 2 has suggested that you cite specific references. You are welcome to add it/them if you believe they are relevant. However, you are not required to include these citations, and if you do not include them, this will not influence my decision.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: It is PeerJ policy that additional references suggested during the peer-review process should only be included if the authors are in agreement that they are relevant and useful #]
a. Abstract : Adequately written
b. Introduction: Adequately written
c. Methodology: Kindly refer to the statement “Exclusion criteria were individuals with less than five years of job experience and those 240 who did not intend to participate in the research.” There is no need to mention it in the exclusion criteria as the authors had already mentioned it in the inclusion criteria as “at least five years of job experience is needed for inclusion.” It implies that those who had less than five years of experience will be excluded.
d. Why the authors keep five years of work experience for inclusion? Is it an arbitrary selection or on the basis of any evidence?
e. Any abbreviations used in table and figures need to be mentioned with expanded version as foot notes
Adequate and appropriate
Appropriate
None
It is a well-written article. I found it interesting. The research question is well mentioned based on the background. The references are adequate and updated.
It is novel research with a fundamental impact on the school health system in Iran.
The impact of the study is long-term and significant on the community of countries like Iran. Also, the nearby countries can utilize and adapt the same instrument and/or same procedure.
I was wondering to have a small para on the schooling system in Iran in Introduction so that readers can get an idea from the article. Secondly, authors could discuss from the below-mentioned paper on psychometric validation
Arafat SY, Chowdhury HR, Qusar MM, Hafez MA. Cross cultural adaptation & psychometric validation of research instruments: A methodological review. J Behav Health. 2016;5(3):129-36. doi: 10.5455/jbh.20160615121755
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.