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.
All reviewers' and editor's comments were addressed.
Dear Author,
Overall, the manuscript is well managed.
- In the abstract, I suggest adding the gap or problem statement in the background. The sampling technique should be mentioned and please clarify the multivariate logistic regression, is it binary or other? Please provide the study implication in the conclusion sections.
- In the introduction, overall is clearly stated. However, I suggest you provide a short explanation of the theoretical framework related to the problem or gaps in your study.
- In the method sections, please mention the reason why do you choose the Port Dickson District as your study location? I suggest you break down the data collection and present the information about independent and dependent variables clearly. You also need the present the instrument used clearly. Providing references would be better.
- In the discussion section. it would be better if you did not re-write the percentage or any statistical values from the findings. You should present the meaning of it and discuss it.
- Conclusion, please make a specific related to the program that you initiate to the policymakers and etc.
In the end, please read the guideline carefully and follow each instruction such as the way to write the reference properly. I saw many in-consistency in the reference style.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review and editorial comments are addressed in a response letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. #]
[# PeerJ Staff Note: PeerJ staff have identified that the English language needs to be improved. When you prepare your next revision, please either (i) have a colleague who is proficient in English and familiar with the subject matter review your manuscript, or (ii) contact a professional editing service to review your manuscript. PeerJ can provide language editing services - you can contact us at [email protected] for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title) #]
The authors have written and explained the facts and problems well. So, the readers can figure out what is the problem and aim of this study. But your introduction need to strengthen the novelty of the study. The previous study about long COVID and it's associated factors in Malaysia had done (https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.09.22272168). Please explain what is the difference of your study with that previous study. and it is better if the author also mentions the other previous study out of what I have mentioned before.
The authors have explained the methods well. But I have to clarify:
1. Line 105: What does the author mean about 1988?
2. Line 109: the authors have classified obesity based on the body weight is more than 90 kg. please give the rational or reference. And why the authors did not use other classification system? The body mass index classification method for example.
The author has presented and explained the novelty of the result by including the facts, rationale, and opinions in the discussion section well. But I want to clarify:
1. Line 233-234: to strengthen this novel finding, I suggest the author to review the pre-existing conditions CVD that has the potential for exacerbation of the severity of COVID.
2. Line 295-297 about mental health issues. What are the factors that make long COVID patients have higher risk for mental health problem?
no comment
This article is already good enough, it just needs a slight improvement on some of the sections that I have already marked in the file
a. Why the authors choose in Port Dickson? Is it because of the highest number of long COVID cases in Malaysia, or other reasons, please explain
b. How to get the sample size?
c. Please add the variable section, which consists of dependent and independent variables of this study, a tool used to assess each variable and how it is calculated, as well as determine the value of its validity and reliability
Little grammar and spell check needs to be done.
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.