Prevalence and Factors Associated with Metabolic Syndrome in Patients at a Psychosocial Care Center: A Cross-Sectional Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is well written and composed. The topic is widely known, but requires further research. So I think that after minor corrections and text editing Your study should be published.

1. Table 1 - please devide the data according to the sex of the participants

2. references must be corrected-some mistakes

Author Response

Dear editors, below are the point-by-point responses of the three evaluators' suggestions.

We are grateful for the opportunity to present to the world the deleterious effects suffered by psychiatric patients treated at a Psychosocial Care Center in the city of Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.

We emphasize that we met almost all the suggestions described by the reviewers. These suggestions were fundamental for improving the quality of our article.

In time, we point out that the manuscript was revised by a native translator from England. This reviewer translates and reviews all our studies already published in the MDPI group.

Sincerely;

Prof. Dr. Magno Conceição das Merces

Full Professor at the University of the State of Bahia

-------

The study is well written and composed. The topic is widely known, but requires further research. So I think that after minor corrections and text editing Your study should be published.

1. Table 1 - please devide the data according to the sex of the participants

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

2. references must be corrected-some mistakes

• Replay: Adjustments made in full.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Due to the scarcity of data and studies in the current field of mental health in Brazil, I believe that this is an important study, especially considering the current state of health care provided at the Psychosocial Care Centers.

This reviewer has a few minor suggestions:

1. The authors indicated the certain biomarkers were measured by laboratory analyses, maybe they could just include the type of samples (serum/EDTA plasma etc) these biomarkers were measured in as it will allow the reader to adequately evaluate the levels of these markers.

2. It is important to note that with clinical studies we usually refer to sex as "men and women" and not "male and female". Please correct this throughout the manuscript.

3. In table 2, the different psychiatric diagnoses are indicated. This reviewer would suggest that the authors add a multiple diagnosis category as this would also provide context to how many individuals actually had more than one of the conditions indicated. Especially if you consider the type of medication that was prescribed to these patients.

4. In table 3, the self-reported race is now only compared as "white" and "non-white". This reviewer would suggest that the authors not group the different ethnicities together, as studies have shown that different ethnicities have vastly different metabolic profiles and risk for psychiatric illnesses.

Author Response

Dear editors, below are the point-by-point responses of the three evaluators' suggestions.

We are grateful for the opportunity to present to the world the deleterious effects suffered by psychiatric patients treated at a Psychosocial Care Center in the city of Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.

We emphasize that we met almost all the suggestions described by the reviewers. These suggestions were fundamental for improving the quality of our article.

In time, we point out that the manuscript was revised by a native translator from England. This reviewer translates and reviews all our studies already published in the MDPI group.

Sincerely;

Prof. Dr. Magno Conceição das Merces

Full Professor at the University of the State of Bahia

-----

Due to the scarcity of data and studies in the current field of mental health in Brazil, I believe that this is an important study, especially considering the current state of health care provided at the Psychosocial Care Centers.

This reviewer has a few minor suggestions:

1. The authors indicated the certain biomarkers were measured by laboratory analyses, maybe they could just include the type of samples (serum/EDTA plasma etc) these biomarkers were measured in as it will allow the reader to adequately evaluate the levels of these markers.

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

Enzymatic techniques were used to quantify the laboratory tests evaluated (fasting blood glucose, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides).

2. It is important to note that with clinical studies we usually refer to sex as "men and women" and not "male and female". Please correct this throughout the manuscript.

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

3. In table 2, the different psychiatric diagnoses are indicated. This reviewer would suggest that the authors add a multiple diagnosis category as this would also provide context to how many individuals actually had more than one of the conditions indicated. Especially if you consider the type of medication that was prescribed to these patients.

• Replay: Adjustments made in full.

 

• In table 3, the self-reported race is now only compared as "white" and "non-white". This reviewer would suggest that the authors not group the different ethnicities together, as studies have shown that different ethnicities have vastly different metabolic profiles and risk for psychiatric illnesses.
• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. We grouped into “non-white" as we had a low response rate for races other than browns and blacks. In addition, the definition of color was made by the individual's self-report and not by the use of identification of pheotypical characteristics that define race, which can generate conflicts even in this classification of the color variable. In addition, we understand that racial miscgenation in Brazil is quite intense and thus the race/color criterion is something genetically debatable in our population.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have studied the prevalence and factors associated with Metabolic Syndrome in 2 Patients at a Psychosocial Care Center. The paper is well written. However, I have several comments for improving the scientific presentation:

Please check line 61  for "MS is associated to a greater 61 chance of cardiovascular outcome" and define cardiovascular outcome or rephrase to enhance clarity.

Please check line 133 for "blood pressure ≥130 × 85mmHg" and replace "x." 

Please consider improving table 1. It is not relevant how many psychiatric drugs patients use. Instead, consider writing the used drug classes, which may affect the patient's metabolic state.

Please check line 238 and 244 if correct "95% dCI: 95% confidence intervals;".

Please check the reference list and update it all in the correct style.

Author Response

Dear editors, below are the point-by-point responses of the three evaluators' suggestions.

We are grateful for the opportunity to present to the world the deleterious effects suffered by psychiatric patients treated at a Psychosocial Care Center in the city of Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.

We emphasize that we met almost all the suggestions described by the reviewers. These suggestions were fundamental for improving the quality of our article.

In time, we point out that the manuscript was revised by a native translator from England. This reviewer translates and reviews all our studies already published in the MDPI group.

Sincerely;

Prof. Dr. Magno Conceição das Merces

Full Professor at the University of the State of Bahia

------

The authors have studied the prevalence and factors associated with Metabolic Syndrome in 2 Patients at a Psychosocial Care Center. The paper is well written. However, I have several comments for improving the scientific presentation:

Please check line 61  for "MS is associated to a greater 61 chance of cardiovascular outcome" and define cardiovascular outcome or rephrase to enhance clarity.

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

Please check line 133 for "blood pressure ≥130 × 85mmHg" and replace "x."

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

Please consider improving table 1. It is not relevant how many psychiatric drugs patients use. Instead, consider writing the used drug classes, which may affect the patient's metabolic state.

• Replay: The frequency of use of the different classes of psychotropic drugs was not included in Table 1, as we used the table 2 as a table focused on psychiatric data, and in this we placed the psychopharmaceuticals by class, as their association with the prevalence of metabolic syndrome.

Please check line 238 and 244 if correct "95% dCI: 95% confidence intervals;".

• Replay: Thanks for your suggestion. I highlighted the changes made to the text in yellow.

Please check the reference list and update it all in the correct style.

• Replay: Adjustments made in full.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc