Pathogenesis and Management of COVID-19

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The main drawback of the paper are the following:

The Introduction section is missing. This section is important because has the role to justify the significance of the research and to give the answer to the question how this research is adding to the body of knowledge in the research area.

What is the importance of the Table 1. summarizes drugs that decreases the neutrophils? The information from this table can be added as the text at the end of the section 2. Virus Biology. A synthesis of the information of the two stages: Early internalization pathway (non-endocytic pathway) and Late internalization pathway (Receptor-Mediated endocytosis pathway) needs to be concentrated in a table.

I recommend to critically analysis the Table 2. shows some cytokines/chemokines that mediates cytokine storm, with their subsequent  antagonists. The title of this table needs improvements, because now seems to be a sentence that introduce it – “shows some….”, “with their subsequent  antagonists”.

 The sections 4  Notes on some currently administered Pharmacological Modulating agents and 5 Food Supplements that might prevent COVID-19 complications - are rich in references, but this references are not critically discussed and the two sections did not contain a well-developed and articulated theoretical framework.

For related your research with management, see the following paper: Burlea-Schiopoiu, A., Ferhati, K. 2021. The Managerial Implications of the Key Performance Indicators in Healthcare Sector: A Cluster Analysis. Healthcare, 9, 19, https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/healthcare9010019

I suggest to improve your paper by discussing in more detail how past research makes this review necessary and relevant. It is important to connect your findings with your literature data more directly to help give the findings more overall context.

Good luck!

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall the paper is well written.  There are a few rough patches that need to be ironed out prior to publication.

I found the abstract incredibly difficult to follow. 

line 25 - "most recently developed" this phrase needs to be changed. It can be read as a lab developed virus in English. I am sure the authors would like to avoid this interpretation.

line 26 - "deaths until the writing ..." should be altered to "deaths at the time of writing."

line 26-29 - sentence beginning with "It occurs due to ... " is too long. I found it confusing and not entirely to the point. Perhaps break it up into 2 or more sentences.

line 29 - "Regardless, cyto- ... "  delete 'Regardless'

line 30-31 - "is increased to contribute to the instigation"  needs clarification.

line 31 - delete "Because"

The historical preface needs tweaking. It has a few incomplete sentences and requires a few additional dates for clarity.

line 42 - "Infectious Bronchitis ..."  it is not clear from the start that this is a coronavirus.  Same with line 43.   A starting sentence noting the coronaviruses were first 'discovered' or 'isolated' in 1930 with ... should help contextualize the remaining information

line 47 - "Human coronavirus 229E ..." is an incomplete sentence.

line 48 - delete "Then" and add a date.

line 50 - delete "Then"

line 56 -  after "ten subtypes" you may want to consider adding 'thus far' after it.

line 67 - "to (i) interacts ..." does not work grammatically

line 76 - "... and governed ..." replace with "... while being governed ..."

line 79 - split the sentence into 2 at the comma between "membranes, a process"

line 89 - pluralize "infect"

line 90-91 this is a problematic sentence that needs rewriting for clarity

line 98 - "role in the ..."  delete "the"

line 153 - delete "also"

line 197 - "was early" insert "used in" so it read "was used in early"

line 258 - capitalize covid

line 347 - replace "was" with "has been"

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Good luck!

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.