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.
Thank you for submitting the revised manuscript and addressing all the reviewer's comments.
no comment
no comment
no comment
no comment
The article is clear and unambiguous, and included sufficient references.
Methods used are well thought and desribed.
Impact and conclusion of the manuscript well written.
Please address all the comments and send the revised version with point by point response to reviewers.
Thanks
- Line 117-119: Please recheck the English language. For manuscript, I recommend you to change " I " to "this study" for formal.
- Line 123-129: Please describe the details of VAS in this study, from your reference (Haefeli & Elfering, 2006), you used VAS 10 cm. (line 123-127) but categorized VAS scores like you mark 1 - 10 or GRS (line 127-129). If you used VAS and measured the distance of subject's marked from zero in millimeter (mm) please categorized in rang of mm. such as no pain (0-4 mm), mild pain (5-44 mm).
- Table 3 : column " Pain area" should place over 5 areas of this table because the 3 levels pain, n and % are not pain area
- Table 4 : Please check grammar of this title again
- Table 4: Please recheck your data in "lack of regular exercise" again. Summation of n in Had muscle pain in past 7 days and Muscle flexibility not equal 211 but 208
- The title of table 2 and figure 1 should re-write and add the details of these table and figure such as muscle flexibility in .......
- Should indicate the sample size calculation for this study.
no comment
Figures preparing study design and results obtained would be better to understand.
Authors should prepare a figure depicting flow-chart of the study design.
Did authors excluded/taken concern of the subjects who have any prior arthritis symptoms, or having family arthritis issue reported before.
no comment.
This manuscript tackles a significant research area focusing on work-related musculoskeletal disorders and associated health risk behaviors among market vendors. It is organized according to a traditional structure that aptly delineates the study's objectives, methodology, results, and conclusions, facilitating comprehension of the multifaceted data gathered. One general comment is that to enhance the significance of your findings, it's crucial to compare the health metrics observed in market vendors with those of the general population. Please include statistical data from existing research to showcase how market vendors differ or align with wider population trends. Furthermore, there are several aspects of the manuscript that require enhancement:
Line 44-45: The conclusion regarding muscle pain distribution among market vendors lacks a clear linkage to the presented data. Please clarify the specific analyses or data points that substantiate these findings. If the data does not fully support this statement, consider revising or providing additional evidence to enhance the validity and reliability of the conclusions. This would help ensure that the conclusions drawn are firmly rooted in the empirical data gathered during the study.
Line 67: The acronym "WRMDs" is introduced earlier in line 48 and should not be redefined here or in subsequent mentions, such as in line 92.
Line 81-89: The section on drug misuse among market vendors currently offers a succinct summary but lacks depth in terms of the background and specific issues related to this demographic. To strengthen this subsection, it would be beneficial to incorporate a more detailed introduction to drug misuse, emphasizing its relevance to the physical and mental health of market vendors. Additionally, integrating a more extensive review of the literature would provide a broader context and highlight the unique aspects of drug misuse within this population compared to other occupational groups.
Line 99-100: The current description of the study's inclusion criteria uses the phrase "being male or female," which is somewhat redundant and could be streamlined for clarity and inclusivity.
Line 118: replace “I” with “we”.
Line 184-185: The term "Most" inaccurately describes 25.4%. Please revise for precision or provide a clearer context for this percentage.
Table 1: Please consider report working hours with more categories, such as “8-10”, “10-12”, “>12”.
Table 2: it may help the reader if you could clarify what is “Normal” and “Negative result”.
The manuscript would benefit from a more detailed description of how "Alcohol consumption," "Drug misuse," and "Lack of regular exercise" were quantified and assessed. Please specify the instruments or scales used, the frequency and method of data collection, and any operational definitions applied to these variables.
No comment.
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.