Next Article in Journal
Brugada Syndrome within Asian Populations: State-of-the-Art Review
Previous Article in Journal
Sex Differences in Fatty Acid Metabolism and Blood Pressure Response to Dietary Salt in Humans
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Prevalence of Polymorphisms of Genes Responsible for Coagulation System and Folate Metabolism and Their Predictive Value for Thrombosis Development in MINOCA Patients: Immediate and Long-Term Prognoses

Cardiogenetics 2023, 13(2), 47-60; https://doi.org/10.3390/cardiogenetics13020006
by Sofia Kruchinova 1,2, Vladimir Shvartz 3,*, Alim Namitokov 1,2, Milana Gendugova 2, Maria Karibova 2 and Elena Kosmacheva 1,2
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Cardiogenetics 2023, 13(2), 47-60; https://doi.org/10.3390/cardiogenetics13020006
Submission received: 6 February 2023 / Revised: 3 March 2023 / Accepted: 30 March 2023 / Published: 7 April 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. ethical comittee aproval must be written in methods

2. Authors must mentioned the how he got the conern from patients

3. Study design is not clear, Revise it and mentions it all parameters

4. add (*) to significant data in tables

5. Findings of this study are not clear in conculsion, revise the conculsion focusing the impact of study

6. Improve the language 

 

Author Response

We are grateful to our reviewer for his or her very important comments to our work. We tried to correct all shortcomings according to these comments. All changes in the text are highlighted in green.

 

  1. ethical comittee aproval must be written in methods

We have moved this information to the "Materials and Methods" section.

  1. Authors must mentioned the how he got the conern from patients

We have added this information to the «Materials and Methods» section.

  1. Study design is not clear, Revise it and mentions it all parameters

 

We probably formulated this information incorrectly. We corrected this in the text of the article.

  1. add (*) to significant data in tables

We have added (*) to significant data in tables.

  1. Findings of this study are not clear in conculsion, revise the conculsion focusing the impact of study

The "Conclusion" section has been modified.

  1. Improve the language

Thank you for your comments. We used the services of a native-speaking editor who improved the English style of the article.

Reviewer 2 Report

I will request the authors to include more references in the discussion section. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer

We are grateful to our reviewer for his or her very important comments to our work. All changes in the text are highlighted in green.

 

The "Discussion" section has been modified.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors ;

The survey of the prognostic value of MTHFR 1298 A>C (rs1801131) and F1 (-455 G>A) rs1800790 gene polymorphisms in the case of in-hospital fatality has been significantly impacted by this manuscript (cardiogenetics-2234325). On the other side, the authors noted that they did not discover any predictive value of polymorphism of examined genes in the blood coagulation and folate route, therefore it is vital for further researchers to explore on alternative genetic pathways. The introduction, search approach, outcome, statistical methods, and discussion are all quite excellent. The current theory and other relevant studies in the literature were interpreted in the study. Every procedure was clearly demonstrated.

In the comments section, I'd advise including this article; Dong X, Wang J, Wang G, Wang J, Wang L, Du Y. MTHFR A1298C gene polymorphism on stroke risk: an updated meta-analysis. Genes Environ. 2021 Sep 25;43(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s41021-021-00208-z. PMID: 34563265; PMCID: PMC8467014.

This manuscript is well-written, brief, and clear overall. 

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer

We are grateful to our reviewer for his high appreciation of our work. All changes in the text are highlighted in green.

 

We read the article recommended by him. This turned out to be useful in the discussion section.

The "Discussion" section has been modified.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

accept in current form

 

Back to TopTop