Jump to content

Talk:WikiJournal of Medicine/Mealtime difficulty in older people with dementia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikiversity
< Talk:WikiJournal of Medicine
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Netha Hussain in topic Comments from Reviewer 3

WikiJournal of Medicine
Open access • Publication charge free • Public peer review • Wikipedia-integrated

WikiJournal of Medicine is an open-access, free-to-publish, Wikipedia-integrated academic journal for Medical and Biomedical topics. <seo title=" WJM, WikiJMed, Wiki.J.Med., WikiJMed, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, WikiJournal Medicine, Wikipedia Medicine, Wikipedia medical journal, WikiMed, Wikimedicine, Wikimedical, Medicine, Biomedicine, Free to publish, Open access, Open-access, Non-profit, online journal, Public peer review "/>

<meta name='citation_doi' value='10.15347/wjm/2019.006'>

Article information

Authors: Salma Rehman[a]  , Gloria Likupe[a]  , Roger Watson[a][i]  

See author information ▼
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 University of Hull, UK
  1. ↑ r.watson@hull.ac.uk

 

Plagiarism check

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The WMF's plagiarism check tool points out that 'violation is likely' with 49.5% confidence. Please see the results here. Most instances of plagiarism were reported for the phrase "older people with dementia", which could be ignored. There is one instance starting with "improvements in dietary intake and/or nutritional status ..." which needs to be addressed. --Netha Hussain (discuss • contribs) 10:17, 12 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks - noted and re-worded to reduce similarity; N.B. - for accuracy we did use verbatim quotes from articles and noted (asterisked) this at foot of table; however, we have reworded the offending section - which actually benefited from this - in the hope that this is OK. Rwatson1955 (discuss) 14:39, 12 March 2019‎

Initial editorial comments

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion


Comments by Netha Hussain M.B.B.S ,


Thank you for submitting this article to WikiJournal of Medicine. The article is quite comprehensive and adds knowledge to the current state of research on mealtime difficulty in older people with dementia. I have a few minor concerns:

  1. The manuscript could be improved with links to relevant Wikipedia pages. Several terms used frequently in this article (such as dementia) have well-written Wikipedia pages about them. Please consider linking subject specific terms to the relevant Wikipedia page about the same.
  2. Similarly, external links could be added for databases (MEDLINE etc), ideally to the page that shows your search results, or to the home page.
  3. The link to PROSPERO registration is broken. Please update this.
  4. The reference to Watson and Green (2016) cannot be found in the reference list.
  5. Please consider adding references for these statements: "The most common type of dementia is Alzheimer’s disease followed by vascular dementia, Lewy Body dementia and frontotemporal dementia" and "Eating, on the other hand, is defined as the quantity of food a person chooses to eat".
  6. The page numbers of the referenced source could be added within the reference tag, instead of placing them within brackets. I see that Seibens et al (p 192-198) was done this way, but not some other sources. --Netha Hussain (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
Response

Corresponding author's response:

  1. The manuscript could be improved with links to relevant Wikipedia pages. Several terms used frequently in this article (such as dementia) have well-written Wikipedia pages about them. Please consider linking subject specific terms to the relevant Wikipedia page about the same.
    • I have tried to do this throughout and hope I have done it properly.
  2. Similarly, external links could be added for databases (MEDLINE etc), ideally to the page that shows your search results, or to the home page.
    • I have linked to the relevant Wikiperdia pages.
  3. The link to PROSPERO registration is broken. Please update this.
    • I have fixed this.
  4. The reference to Watson and Green (2016) cannot be found in the reference list.
    • My mistake, this is Watson and Green (2006)
  5. Please consider adding references for these statements: "The most common type of dementia is Alzheimer’s disease followed by vascular dementia, Lewy Body dementia and frontotemporal dementia" and "Eating, on the other hand, #*is defined as the quantity of food a person chooses to eat".
    • The first was a reference to the Alzheimer's Society webpage so it has been moved to the end of the previous sentence where the statement is made. I have rewritten the second point for clarification and added a link which I hope is appropriate.
  6. The page numbers of the referenced source could be added within the reference tag, instead of placing them within brackets. I see that Seibens et al (p 192-198) was done this way, but not some other sources.
    • I am sorry but I don't understand what you mean here - they all seem identical to me and I followed exactly the same format throughout.
    • Comment 20 Feb 2019 - I think we clarified this now.

Comments from Reviewer 1

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion


Review by Anonymous reviewer , Associate Professor from Slovenia
These assessment comments were submitted on , and refer to this previous version of the article

First I would like to thank the authors for their interesting submission that I see as an important contribution to a WikiJournal of Medicine. Rehman et al. evaluate the evidence in mealtime difficult in older people with dementia through a review of systematic reviews on the effectiveness of related interventions. The paper offers a clear overview of the methodological steps taken to perform the systematic review including the list of databases used to perform the search, well defined search strategy with inclusion/exclusion criteria, critical appraisal tool (CASP) and a link to PROSPERO registration of the study. Since this is only the second paper of this kind in WikiJournal of Medicine, it is important that the criteria for methodological robustness of similar studies in the future is set to this level. The conclusions are well supported by the narrative synthesis and analysis of the results which represent two final methodological aspects of a robust review that are often neglected. In some reviews the synthesis of the findings would offer more quantitative results than in this submission, but Rehman et al. explain what were the limitations in reporting in the studies that did not permit to extract more quantitative information. The authors conclude that most of the studies in the area of mealtime interventions aimed at improving eating and nutritional intake are generally low in quality which is an important indicator that more robust research studies should be done in this field.

Two smaller issues that could improve the paper:

  • The search strategy section should also provide the information on who was involved in the search and review process (preferably a minimum of 2 authors) and how were the discrepancies between them resolved.
  • How was this process managed? Did authors use a spreadsheet in the process of selecting the relevant studies?
Response

We thank the reviewer for very positive comments and in answer to the points raised, we respond as follows:

  • we provide more information about the search strategy and who conducted it
  • we think that this is where the PRISMA flowchart can be misleading - we had 100% agreement on the outcome of the search but, in fact, the removal of duplicates was done automatically and only 15 papers remained to be reviewed which were easy to manage on one side of an A4 sheet; not sure if that needs explaining but willing to if necessary.

checkY Reviewer 1 has suggested the manuscript for publication. --Netha Hussain (discuss • contribs) 10:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Comments from Reviewer 2

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion


Review by Anonymous reviewer , Professor from Hong Kong
These assessment comments were submitted on , and refer to this previous version of the article

I think that this is a very strong review of systematic reviews in this area. With global ageing, this topic is of great relevance in the nursing of older people. In my view, this review follows all relevant guidelines and checklists and is rigorous in nature. It should be considered for publication in Wikijournal. I only have a couple of very minor comments. I wonder whether the authors might highlight the international standing of the CASP framework. I also wonder if something should be said about the cultural perspectives that may associated with 'mealtime' feeding in different parts of the world. Finally, I just wonder whether the authors would consider saying a little bit more about their conclusion on the strength of the studies (strong) and quality of the studies (moderate) in the discussion section.

Response

We are very grateful for the generous assessment of this reviewer and also for the suggestions, all of which we have incorporated. We have raised the issue about culture in the background and again in the conclusion; we have provided more on the status of the CASP tool and we have made some reference to the quality of the reviews themselves in the conclusion

checkY Reviewer 2 has suggested the manuscript for publication. --Netha Hussain (discuss • contribs) 10:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Comments from Reviewer 3

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
reviewer-annotated pdf file.
reviewer-annotated pdf

Review by James Faraday , Newcastle University, U.K
These assessment comments were submitted on , and refer to this previous version of the article

Response

An excellent review for which we are very grateful and the outcome of which is a much improved article. Throughout we have addressed the typographical errors you noted, attended to all suggested rewording of sentences and we have broken up the final section into more readable paragraphs. On the substantive points:

  • we have made reference to the Burges Watson study
  • we have added a section on data synthesis
  • regarding the issue of 'older adults' I have added that we also included studies of adults with dementia; then, to expand on the issue of age - which we had not considered - I have added a section to the Results and then picked this up in the Conclusion. This was a weakness in the reviews and an omission by us which is very important.
  • we have clarified the quality assessment process
  • we have clarified the screening process

checkY Reviewer 3 has suggested the article for publication. --Netha Hussain (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:WikiJournal_of_Medicine/Mealtime_difficulty_in_older_people_with_dementia&oldid=2259568"