Next Article in Journal
Lipid Peroxidation and Antioxidative Capacity Are Unaltered in Transitional Breast Milk Exposed to Light from Women Giving Birth to Preterm Infants before 32 Weeks of Gestation
Next Article in Special Issue
Perspective: Teaching Kitchens: Conceptual Origins, Applications and Potential for Impact within Food Is Medicine Research
Previous Article in Journal
Sexual Function and Depressive Symptoms in Young Women with Euthyroid Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis Receiving Vitamin D, Selenomethionine and Myo-Inositol: A Pilot Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Expectations from a Home Cooking Program: Qualitative Analyses of Perceptions from Participants in “Action” and “Contemplation” Stages of Change, before Entering a Bi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/nu15122816
Review Report
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Brief Report
Peer-Review Record

Culinary Medicine eConsults Pair Nutrition and Medicine: A Feasibility Pilot

Nutrients 2023, 15(12), 2816; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15122816
by Jaclyn L. Albin 1,*, Milette Siler 2 and Heather Kitzman 3
Reviewer 1:
Lannie O'Keefe
Reviewer 2:
Kinga Lis
Nutrients 2023, 15(12), 2816; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15122816
Submission received: 16 May 2023 / Revised: 7 June 2023 / Accepted: 16 June 2023 / Published: 20 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue How Can Health and Wellness Promotion Strategies Which Include Nutrition Education alongside Hands-On Cooking Be Organized, Evaluated, and Optimized for Maximal Impact)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this article Albin et al. discuss culinary medicine and put forward eConsults as a way to empower Nutrition in practice. While well presented there are a few issues that need addressing:

1. I find the use of the word culinary medicine is miss represented. What you have discussed is as referral prompt, how does that constitute medicine or treatment? 

2. This reinforced on page 4 line 154-158 Limitations, that's because what you are saying is in no way medicinal or allied treatment, so no it would in no way come close to replacing dietitians.

3. It is not clear who the 11 unique clinicians are? is it the kitchen manager that is doing this culinary medicine? 

4. It is extremely dangerous to create new words around the delivery of and practice of primary health care. You state in future directions page 4 line 161 that this will 'provide-evidenced-based guidance to other clinicians? How by ticking a referal box? 

5. Your evidence in no way supports what you are stating. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This short report is interesting and touches on an interesting, contemporary topic, but I have a few comments:

My comments:

1. I do not see a close relationship between the content of the report and its title - maybe the title should be changed

2. The analysis is carried out on a small group - this may make conclusions difficult - because it is difficult to expect that the authors increase the size of the study group, they should somehow take this into account in the analysis, discussion and conclusions

3. The discussion is very short and not really a discussion - the authors summarized their research but did not critically discuss their results with the results of other authors in the same or very similar research area. This section should be rewritten in the format necessary for discussion.

4. Conclusions are the free thoughts of the authors related to the discussed topic, but do not result directly from the presented results - in my opinion, it is necessary to formulate the conclusions again.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I find this manuscript interesting. The idea of eConsultation in this area may be a good solution in today's digitized society. I don't have specific comments, only one: in line 86 the abbreviation EMR appears, which in the main text is explained only in line 92 - the explanation should be the first time the abbreviation is used (does not apply to the abstract) - please correct it.

 

Back to TopTop