Dimensional Solution of Wooden Chairs for the Adult Bariatric Population of Slovakia: Observational Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is interesting and shows how to define the dimensional solution of wooden chairs for the adult obese people from specific country.
This paper proposes the basic methods of anthropometry and derives the main design parameters of the seat by measuring the main dimensions of
the human body of obese people.

1.  I consider the structure of the manuscript to be appropriate, but the introduction part must be revised. In particular, there is not enough discussion on the relationship between chair design and the anthropometry of obese people. Which sizes and components of the chair are designed to relate to specific parts and indicators of the human body (especially obese people) are not adequately described. No literature review in this area before moving on to the necessity section of this study. E.g.:
Benden, M. E., Fink, R., & Congleton, J. (2011). An In Situ Study of the Habits of Users That Affect Office Chair Design and Testing. Human Factors, 53(1), 38–49.
Lyu, J., Peng, Q., & Chen, M. (2022). Influence of Body Mass Index on Comfort and Parametric Optimization Design of Seat. Tehnički vjesnik, 29(4), 1262-1269.
et al

2. This paper is more similar to laboratory report than to scientific research paper.

3. Although this study has some value and implications for accessible design, most of them are descriptive and general. There are many design parameters for chairs, and this study only deals with the sitting depth, width and height.

4.The word Bariatric generally refers to relating to the treatment of obesity. In this paper it refers more to people with obese characteristics, and the use of word Bariatricseems inaccurate.

5.Conclusions are reasonable,although it should be pointed out that the applicability issue of the presented findings to chair designs for obese
population from other countries.

6.No unit was indicated in all tables of the paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer. Thank you for your review. We have incorporated your comments. Changes are highlighted in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall, the study, although limited only to the territory of the Slovak Republic, presents an exciting and valuable topic. Therefore, I believe there will be interest from the journal readers.

Generally, the manuscript is well prepared, so I have only a few recommendations for the esteemed authors.

In the Abstract, it would be good to give a sentence about the research topic's necessity and usefulness.

In the Introduction: Please split the sentence "The analysis of strength characteristics exceeds the scope of the article; therefore, we will deal with the mentioned issue in further research" (lines 87-88) in two. It would be good if this part ends not with what the authors will not deal with in future research but what is the aim of the present study.

In the Materials and methods: My primary recommendation here is to justify the methods' parameters based on similar studies, and that is to present additional references. For example, in the sentence "Empirical measurements aimed at defining selected anthropometric characteristics of the adult population of Slovakia aged 18–25 were carried out..." (lines 139-140), the question arises why at the age of 18-25 and not, for example, 16-40 and so on.

The data in the "Results" section is well presented. Due to the relative brevity of this part, I ask the authors to consider whether this and the next part should not be merged into a new point, "Results and discussion".

The Discussion part is well prepared, and a comparative analysis with other similar studies has also been carried out.

In my opinion, only the main results achieved (in this study), its main novelty, and its main contributions should be present in the Conclusions part. Therefore, in my opinion, the sentences "As stated by e.g. Fetter et al. [48], with age, the human body constantly changes, grows, develops, and this is also reflected in its dimensions" (lines 224-225) and "For furniture manufacturers, introducing wooden furniture production for bariatric respondents can be a competitive market advantage [49]" (lines 237-238) to be moved to the Introduction part. Also, the sentence regarding the authors' plans, "The strength characteristics of elements and joints of bariatric chairs will be analysed in the following period" (lines 239 - 240), should, in my opinion, be removed.

 

The references cited are appropriate. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer. Thank you for your review. We have incorporated your comments. Changes are highlighted in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The authors have responded appropriately to the reviewers' queries, but not in a standard point-to-point format.

2.The paper has improved significantly after revision.