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.
Dear authors,
Congratulations.
The manuscript has greatly improved after carefully following the reviewers' suggestions.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Jafri Abdullah, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
Dear authors,
Please respond point by point to reviewers' comments and make appropriate revisions.
1. Abstract: you should start with a first paragraph describing the background.
2. The theoretical framework is scarce, you should clearly describe the scientific evidence that supports the hypothesis you have raised.
3. A lot of necessary information is missing in methods section:
- Experimental procedures should be better defined
- More information should be provided about the participants’ characteristics.
- You should better defined inclusion and exclusion criteria
4. The Discussion should be enriched with the existing theory. You should clearly describe the scientific evidence that supports your findings.
5. The references are correct but weak and incomplete, thus they should be enriched. Moreover, it would be appropriate to include the DOI to all references.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The introduction needs more detail. About marginalization there is only one reference. It is recognized the value from quoting study cases, but it is necessary to realize an exhaustive literature review about marginalization to build a solid theory framework. For example: Which elements difference between marginalization and discrimination or segregation or labor precarization?
The study’s objective is exploring the disposition to marginalize healthcare personnel (HP) in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic. But the survey from which the data was collected it was conducted during the second and fourth week of April 2020. This period corresponds only to first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. Nowadays (September 2022) Mexico is living the fifth wave the COVID-19 pandemic.
In introduction indicates 520 participants responded to three instruments to measure the disposition to marginalization. Also, it is indicating 76% participants were residents of northern and 24% from central-southern states of Mexico. Whit these elements the authors concluding that in Mexico it is a Marginalization towards healthcare personnel.
In a country with 126 million of people and a major concentration of people in states of center, it doesn´t allow to accept a sample so few and territorial biased to northern states. It is necessary to use a sample method as well as determinate the error value and confidence level expected.
Thus, results of the Chrombach's Alpha test are valid, but the sample size and the lack of a territorial sampling design do not allow measuring the effect on a national scale. Accepting the results would be accepting a fallacy of exception. The results only serve to validate that particular test.
On another hand, the document contains two studies. Study 1. Descriptive and sociodemographic components of marginalization; and Study 2: Psychosocial predictors of marginalization towards healthcare personnel. After reading them there is a feeling that both studies were made by separated and then they got together. It is necessary to conform to the structure for submitting articles: introduction, literature review, methodology (data, statistical procedure), results presentation, conclusion.
As to references in text it protrudes one document that is referring eight times. The bibliography contains 32 documents and juts one of them have eight references. Also, there are a couple documents aren´t reference in text.
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.