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.
The authors have adressed all comments of all reviewers. The artcle is ready for publication.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Jeremy Loenneke, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
The problems pointed out in the first peer review (tables 3 and 4) have been improved.
no comment.
no comment.
The authors responded appropriately to the two issues and questions I raised.
I suppose that this article meets the PeerJ criteria and should be accepted as is.
I think all the comments have been adequately addressed.
Good.
Valid and fair.
I think it can be accepted; also based on other reviewers (if they concede to acceptance as well).
Please, revise the manuscript considering all reviewer's comments.
I believe that Tables 3 and 4 are important data within this paper, but are somewhat small and difficult to read.
no comment
no comment
Although it does not contain academically significant results, statement data on the problems that society encompasses is considered valuable.
Two points should be addressed by in introduction section or discussion section.
1. The location and duration of pain is important, but the degree of pain is very important. The authors also focus on the response to pain, but I think that there are few cases of special response to weak pain in the first place. Authurs need to discuss the significance of the results of the evaluation without NRS or VAS.
2. Are the 5 coping strategies common measures for chronic musculoskeletal pain? Please discuss the reasons for selecting these five, citing references if possible.
The study is interesting. However, it requires clarity and a clear rationale for conducting the study. In addition, I think the generalizability to the population needs to be discussed as well. The methodology It will be better developed by providing relevant headings and discussed in terms of the STROBE guidelines. The statistical analysis approach and results sections needed revision and expansion in terms of why the particular types of statistics is relevant for this study.
Towards improving the flow, readability and alignment of this paper with standards of similar research, it is advised to rewrite the entire methods section following the STROBE checklist.
The method section is not comprehensive. Include describing the study design scientifically, sampling technique, and questionnaire description (existing or researcher built and validated).
Please elucidate as to why the chi-squared test was used and the validity of the test.
Why were any other tests not used/considered?
Consider using graphs to depict results as well.
Using tables only can be onerous.
I think that while this paper discussed important subjects/concepts, it requires significant improvement before it can be published.
no comment
Two major issues:
First, the validity of the pain questionnaire is unclear. The authors did not provide any justification for this pain questionnaire. I think the authors could check other databases, such as the UK Biobank.
Secondly, the use of painkillers and the use of surgery/injections are important parts of pain-related treatments, which should not be ignored in the questionnaire.
Because of these two main issues, I think the current study is more appropriate as an exploratory study. The authors should be careful in their explanations and discussions.
no comment
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.