Subjective Well-Being and Self-Assessed Health of Adolescents: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript.  The authors did a very good job with the writing and presentation.   

I suggest informing the reader about the nature of the sample of participants being in a boarding school.  I made this assumption based on the description of the setting as dormitories.   This brings me to my next comment of whether there boarding school is a factor or it impacts the students responses.  There is a boarding school syndrome concept that relates to students reports of depression and emotional numbness in some studies. 

Additionally, I recommend a brief discussion with relation to brain maturation over the course of the study.  As a longitudinal study, the participants were 15 at the time data was collected and again collected two years later. 

Thank you. 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript.  The authors did a very good job with the writing and presentation.   

I suggest informing the reader about the nature of the sample of participants being in a boarding school.  I made this assumption based on the description of the setting as dormitories.   This brings me to my next comment of whether there boarding school is a factor or it impacts the students responses.  There is a boarding school syndrome concept that relates to students reports of depression and emotional numbness in some studies. 

Additionally, I recommend a brief discussion with relation to brain maturation over the course of the study.  As a longitudinal study, the participants were 15 at the time data was collected and again collected two years later. 

Thank you. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer!

Thank you for your insightful feedback and constructive suggestions regarding our manuscript. We have carefully considered your comments and have made all the necessary revisions.

Detailed explanations of these revisions can be found in the document attached to this correspondence. We believe these changes comprehensively address your concerns and significantly enhance the quality and clarity of our manuscript.

We appreciate the opportunity to refine our work based on your guidance and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study evaluates the relationship between subjective health and well-being in adolescents during secondary education. It's a significant topic, but there are some concerns about the methodology and content of the paper. A key issue is that baseline well-being was not adjusted in the multiple regression analysis, making it unclear whether baseline subjective health affects well-being at the time of evaluation. Here are some points for revision:

 

Abstract: Please clearly state the purpose of the study in the abstract.

Keywords: Add the research design and the region where the survey was conducted to the keywords for better clarity.

Terminology of Quality of Life and Well-being: There seems to be some confusion in the use of the terms 'quality of life' and 'well-being'. Please clarify these terms and review their use throughout the paper, including in the title.

Novelty in Introduction: Specify what is new about this study (novelty) in the introduction section.

Materials and Methods: Mention in section 2 that the characteristics shown in Table 1 were investigated. 

Detailed Analysis Methods: In the Materials and Methods section, add the analysis methods. Include procedures for all analyses conducted from Table 1 to Table 4, the software used, and the significance level, as these are generally necessary details.

P-Values: In lines 138 to 151, the use of * or ** after P-values might be unnecessary since the P-values are already mentioned.

Economic Status in Table 4: If ES stands for economic status, why is it abbreviated only here? Please use the full term. Also, ensure consistency between 'Socioeconomic status' in Table 1 and 'ES' in Table 4. If they are the same indicator, use uniform terminology. If they are different, it's peculiar to introduce a new indicator at this point.

P-value in Table 4: Is the note p<.006 meant to be p=.006?

Adjustment of Baseline Well-being in Analysis: The analysis in Table 4 does not adjust for baseline well-being.

Author Response

Dear reviewer!

Thank you for your insightful feedback and constructive suggestions regarding our manuscript. We have carefully considered your comments and have made all the necessary revisions.

Detailed explanations of these revisions can be found in the document attached to this correspondence. We believe these changes comprehensively address your concerns and significantly enhance the quality and clarity of our manuscript.

We appreciate the opportunity to refine our work based on your guidance and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled "Subjective Well-being and Self-assessed Health of Adoles-2 cents: A Longitudinal Cohort Study" is suitable for the journal and I believe that it may be relevant to the journal's mission, as it contributes to increasing the field of knowledge in relation to personal well-being during adolescence.

The abstract of the article is adequate and briefly explains the content of the study conducted. However, the authors should explain the aim of the study more clearly.

The key words are also adequate.

The title of the article corresponds to the content of the paper and its main objective is none other than to monitor personal well-being during adolescence, specifically to examine the relationship between subjective quality of life and self-rated health of adolescents during secondary education and to explore sociographic and health predictors of subjective quality of life.

The paper is well structured, facilitating the understanding of the study. The theoretical foundation is based on the object of the study. I consider that the authors should make the research questions explicit.

Method: the methodological design is a longitudinal study. The authors use a questionnaire for the study. This evaluator considers that more data should be provided on the validation process of these instruments, as this may influence the results obtained. I also consider the sample to be appropriate. 

The research phases are presented in a clear and structured way. 

The figures and tables used contribute to the reader's understanding.

Results: this evaluator considers that the results shown in terms of the study problem are adequately presented, as well as the discussion of these results. Also, the future lines of research and the limitations of this study". 

In short, I consider that this is a work that can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence subjective well-being and self-perceived health.

Author Response

Dear reviewer!

Thank you for your insightful feedback and constructive suggestions regarding our manuscript. We have carefully considered your comments and have made all the necessary revisions.

Detailed explanations of these revisions can be found in the document attached to this correspondence. We believe these changes comprehensively address your concerns and significantly enhance the quality and clarity of our manuscript.

We appreciate the opportunity to refine our work based on your guidance and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think it was well revised in a short period.

If possible, please add references to lines 82-93.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for acknowledging the revisions made in a short timeframe. I appreciate your constructive feedback. I will certainly add references to lines 82-93. Your guidance is invaluable in refining this work.

Best regards,

Gómez-López M,; Viejo, C,; Ortega-Ruiz R. Psychological Well-Being During Adolescence: Stability and Association With Romantic Relationships. Psychol. 2019, 10:1772. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01772

Villanueva L,; Prado-Gascó V,; Montoya-Castilla I. Longitudinal analysis of subjective well-being in preadolescents: The role of emotional intelligence, self-esteem and perceived stress. J Health Psychol. 2022, 27(2):278-291. doi:10.1177/1359105320951605