Adverse Effects in Patients with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Hospitalized at the University Clinical Hospital

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review the work.

The work is very interesting and innovative. Here are some comments:

- Has the study been registered with Clinical Trials? It is so interesting that I propose to obtain a research number.

- The researchers decided to address 104 histories to compensate for possible losses - why 104?

 

I believe that the work is so interesting that the authors may try to carry out further research on the scale of other countries and compare them with the results of their own research.

I believe that the work meets the publication requirements.

Reviewer

Author Response

Good morning:

With regard to the first recommendation to register the research as a clinical trial, we will take it into account and I will make the necessary arrangements with the Hospital Clínico Universitario de Salamanca.
Regarding the question you ask about why 104 clinical records were reviewed and used, was it because they foresaw that there would be losses, as it was. The researchers decided to review 104 records to compensate for possible losses. Of these, 6 stories did not match the selection criteria, 4 could not be located and for 2 no equivalent could be found, so 92 pairs were finally analysed".

This is explained in two paragraphs of the Material and Methods just after the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

Finally, we thank you for your comments and for your work in reviewing this research.

Kind regards

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to revise the manuscript entitled: "Adverse Effects in Patients with Intellectual and Developmen-tal Disabilities hospitalized at the University Clinical Hospital". The manuscript is very interesting and it could be accepted since it is very relevant and interesting in its topic. The aim of the present study was to assess the patient with the Health Care they need in a personalized and appropriate manner and without Adverse Effects (AEs) as a clinical risk in pa-tients with high social vulnerability such as Persons with Intellectual and Developmental Disabili-ties (PwIDD). The manuscript is well written and also the quality of the tables is very satisfactory. The reference list exhaustively covers the relevant literature in an unbiased way. Statistical methodologies are valid and coherent with the aim of the study. All the methodology section is sufficiently documented in order to allow replication studies. The manuscript follows a high rigor in its structure, high quality in the writing and in the quality of the content. I believe that the manuscript will capture the interest of the audience interesting in this field.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

I thank you on behalf of all the authors for your review work and comment on the question you ask me for selecting and addressing 104 stories was to compensate for possible losses. Of these, 6 stories did not match the selection criteria, 4 could not be located and for 2 no equivalent could be found, so 92 pairs were finally analysed".This is the explanation reflected in a paragraph of the Methodology section. That is the explanation that we reflect in a paragraph of the Methodology section, in the last paragraph before 2.5 Variables studied.

Thank you very much for your understanding and best regards.