Eating Behavior during First-Year College Students, including Eating Disorders—RUVIC-RUNEAT-TCA Project. Protocol of an Observational Multicentric Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Some minor comments:
Introduction: line 61: students and especially males instead of males and females. Line 63: delete "and worse in males"
lines 84,85: please write it better, more clear
line 86: are instead of were
Participant recruitment: Again why do you use past time?
Data collection and measures: line 139: and habits related to their food intake.
line 186: (MEDAS-14) is a validated dietary assessment tool
Statistical analysis: line 243: will be instead of were
Discussion: line 247: is to instead of will
lines 253-257: Use plural form, not singular
line 276: Please add also the percentage for tobacco use
line 288: consumption of ED? prevalence?
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments and contributions that have been very useful to us to improve this protocol.
Below we expose what is related to their appreciations:
- Introduction: line 61: students and especially males instead of males and females. Line 63: delete "and worse in males"
We correct this sentence.
- lines 84,85: please write it better, more clear
We have changed the wording and we hope that it can be understood more easily
- line 86: are instead of were
- Participant recruitment: Again why do you use past time?
- Statistical analysis: line 243: will be instead of were
We have done a linguistic check and the incorrect verb forms have been changed.
- Data collection and measures: line 139: and habits related to their food intake.
We correct this sentence.
- line 186: (MEDAS-14) is a validated dietary assessment tool
We correct this sentence.
- Discussion: line 247: is to instead of will
We correct this sentence.
- lines 253-257: Use plural form, not singular FET
We correct this sentence.
- line 276: Please add also the percentage for tobacco use
We have added the percentage related to smoking.
- line 288: consumption of ED? prevalence?
We correct this word.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors, my suggestions are in the comments in the manuscript.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments and contributions that have been very useful to us to improve this protocol.
We have responded in their own comments attached in the pdf sent.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
It is an interesting and relevant study, especially in the Spanish context, where studies on this subject are limited (as the authors explain in the introduction).
The following are the proposals of the review:
INTRODUCTION
- Lines 55 - 59. Revise the expression of the paragraph, especially the first sentence.
- Line 71. Indicate that the MEDAS-14 is a questionnaire. This is the first time it appears in text.
- Lines 71-73. It is not necessary to indicate again that the results are based on the MEDAS-14. It has been mentioned in the previous sentence.
- In general, the introduction provides very interesting data, but they seem loose. It is recommended to connect and group similar information.
- It is proposed to differentiate between the main objective and the secondary objectives (if possible grouped together) instead of writing a list of 5 objectives.
MATERIALS ANS METHODS
- Study Design. It is indicated that this study aims to evaluate the predisposition to suffer ED, however, this does not appear in the objectives. How is this predisposition going to be evaluated?
Line 95. It is indicated that the study has 3 phases and in subsequent lines (line 104) it is explained again. It is proposed to eliminate the first time.
Table 1. Some references are missing. Complete.
- Participant Recruitment. Confusion with verb tenses. Sometimes the wording is in the future tense and sometimes in the past tense, creating confusion. As this is a protocol, the future is recommended.
- Inclusion and Exclusion Procedures. It is recommended to include this section in the previous one.
In the inclusion criteria, it is recommended to separate the criterion of place of residence from that of 1st year and sex.
- Sample size. The parameters for calculating the sample size necessary for this research are explained, but the result of this calculation is not indicated. Please add the data.
- Data Collection and Measures. Differentiate between the main outcome measure and the other outcome measures.
Lines 133-134. You can refer back to Table 1.
In some tests the acronym appears directly and in others the full name and then the acronym. Please put the full name and then the acronym in parentheses the first time it appears in the text.
Sometimes the name of the author of the instrument appears and sometimes not. Please unify (as the reference is, you can choose to eliminate the names and thus lighten the text).
Line 218. Clarify the acronyms SFA, MUFA and PUFA.
- There is no information on how this will be done and/or what the handling of the data will consist of, nor if the current regulations were complied with. Add a paragraph before "Statistical Analysis" with this information.
- Statistical analysis. The information on the sample size could be placed in this section.
Indicate how quantitative variables will be expressed if they do not comply with a normal distribution.
It is indicated that Student's t-test, ANOVA, or the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test will be used. It is not indicated when (under what conditions) each one will be used.
Line 235. 2 groups are indicated (students living with their parents and students living in residence). What about students who share an apartment?
- Add a final section on "Ethical Approval, Ethical Considerations and Dissemination".
DISCUSSION
- It would be interesting to differentiate between the biases (indicating the measures to be taken to reduce them) and the limitations of the research (indicating why, in spite of them, it is a timely study).
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments and contributions that have been very useful to us to improve this protocol.
Below we expose what is related to their appreciations:
INTRODUCTION
- Lines 55 - 59. Revise the expression of the paragraph, especially the first sentence.
This sentence has been revised and modified.
- Line 71. Indicate that the MEDAS-14 is a questionnaire. This is the first time it appears in text.
This note has been added to the text.
- Lines 71-73. It is not necessary to indicate again that the results are based on the MEDAS-14. It has been mentioned in the previous sentence.
It has been revised and removed.
- In general, the introduction provides very interesting data, but they seem loose. It is recommended to connect and group similar information.
We have redone the writing to make it easier to read.
- It is proposed to differentiate between the main objective and the secondary objectives (if possible grouped together) instead of writing a list of 5 objectives.
The objectives have been listed.
MATERIALS ANS METHODS
- Study Design. It is indicated that this study aims to evaluate the predisposition to suffer ED, however, this does not appear in the objectives. How is this predisposition going to be evaluated?
This information has been added at this point.
Line 95. It is indicated that the study has 3 phases and in subsequent lines (line 104) it is explained again. It is proposed to eliminate the first time.
It has been modified as suggested.
Table 1. Some references are missing. Complete.
The missing references have been added and the bibliographic citation of the entire article has been readjusted.
- Participant Recruitment. Confusion with verb tenses. Sometimes the wording is in the future tense and sometimes in the past tense, creating confusion. As this is a protocol, the future is recommended.
We have done a linguistic check and the incorrect verb forms have been changed.
- Inclusion and Exclusion Procedures. It is recommended to include this section in the previous one.
The change has been made.
In the inclusion criteria, it is recommended to separate the criterion of place of residence from that of 1st year and sex.
These criteria have been modified.
- Sample size. The parameters for calculating the sample size necessary for this research are explained, but the result of this calculation is not indicated. Please add the data.
The result of the estimate calculation based on the offer of places for first-year students has been added.
- Data Collection and Measures. Differentiate between the main outcome measure and the other outcome measures.
We have differentiated these measures.
Lines 133-134. You can refer back to Table 1.
The reference to table 1 is added.
In some tests the acronym appears directly and in others the full name and then the acronym. Please put the full name and then the acronym in parentheses the first time it appears in the text.
The use of the full name and its acronym has been revised and modified.
Sometimes the name of the author of the instrument appears and sometimes not. Please unify (as the reference is, you can choose to eliminate the names and thus lighten the text).
It has been revised and modified.
Line 218. Clarify the acronyms SFA, MUFA and PUFA.
The full name has been added as it is the first time it appears in the text.
- There is no information on how this will be done and/or what the handling of the data will consist of, nor if the current regulations were complied with. Add a paragraph before "Statistical Analysis" with this information.
This information has been added in a new point on ethical aspects.
- Statistical analysis. The information on the sample size could be placed in this section.
This information has been added at this point.
Indicate how quantitative variables will be expressed if they do not comply with a normal distribution.
This information has been added at this point.
It is indicated that Student's t-test, ANOVA, or the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test will be used. It is not indicated when (under what conditions) each one will be used.
It has been described how these variables will be evaluated.
Line 235. 2 groups are indicated (students living with their parents and students living in residence). What about students who share an apartment?
It has been added in the text although students who live in apartment will be analyzed in the same group as those who live in residence.
- Add a final section on "Ethical Approval, Ethical Considerations and Dissemination".
This information has been added at this point.
DISCUSSION
- It would be interesting to differentiate between the biases (indicating the measures to be taken to reduce them) and the limitations of the research (indicating why, in spite of them, it is a timely study).
This information has been added at the end of this point.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
