Italian Cross-Cultural Adaptation of a Knowledge Assessment Tool (IBD-KID2) for Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to read this manuscript on the translation and adaptation of a tool to assess the knowledge level of children with IBD. Colleagues involved in caring for these young patients need assessment tools to provide the best care to each individual, so works like this are essential.
Please consider changing the wording at lines 299-300 and use the more appropriate wording at lines 257-258 because children cannot consent, but their parents can consent (and their children can provide assent).
In the manuscript a sample size calculation is missing, it should be provided.
Author Response
Please consider changing the wording at lines 299-300 and use the more appropriate wording at lines 257-258 because children cannot consent, but their parents can consent (and their children can provide assent).
Many thanks for bringing this to our attention, we have changed the wording for those lines in the revised manuscript.
In the manuscript a sample size calculation is missing, it should be provided.
We have added detail in the section ‘4.3.2 Measurement equivalence’ of the revised manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
There are no methods part. Besides, discussion and conclusion sections are very weak.
Author Response
There are no methods part. Besides, discussion and conclusion sections are very weak.
The requirements of the journal, and the template they provide for submission, has the ‘Material and Methods’ (Section 4) at the end of the manuscript, after the Results (Section 2) and Discussion (Section 3). We believe our Discussion (Section 3) provided a critical analysis of our results against the broader literature as related to translation of outcome measures, children’s acquisition of appropriate IBD knowledge, and Italian culture and heritage. If you consider our discussion section to be weak we would be grateful for any specific topics you would like us to explore in addition to those already included. Please find a full description of the translation process and validation study in Section 4 at the end of the original manuscript, and our Discussion previous to this in Section 3.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors.
The format of the manuscript is incorrect.
Material and methods should be described previous to results section.
No further considerations are done as it has been sent in an inappropriate format.
Author Response
Dear authors. The format of the manuscript is incorrect. Material and methods should be described previous to results section. No further considerations are done as it has been sent in an inappropriate format.
The requirements of the journal ‘Gastrointestinal Disorders’, and the template they provide for submission, has the ‘Material and Methods’ section at the end of the manuscript, after the results and discussion. We have adhered to these requirements and, as such, the format is appropriate for submission to this journal. If you would prefer the ‘Material and Methods’ section to be placed prior to the results this would need to be established with, and approved by, the editorial team at ‘Gastrointestinal Disorders’. We are happy to do this with their approval and would be grateful for further review of our manuscript.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for providing the new version of the manuscript.
Congratulations on your work.
Reviewer 2 Report
Even after the revision, the discussion part still seems inadequate. The authors should discuss their results with more up-to-date sources and in a more critical and rigorous manner.
Reviewer 3 Report
