Mortality Reduction in ICU-Admitted COVID-19 Patients in Suriname after Treatment with Convalescent Plasma Acquired Via Gravity Filtration

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Very Good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Good

Comments: Keywords are missing from the manuscript.

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very Good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Good

Comments: The Discussion puts forth the major impact of COVID-19 on health and socio-economy in low to middle-income countries (LMICs). The report highlights the interim results of a non-randomized intervention trial using COVID-19 convalescent plasma obtained via gravity-filtration, mainly among the ICU patients. The Discussion further supports the study comparing the results of the CP patients with that of the control group providing relevant literature. Lastly, the Discussion mentions the limitations of the research. The Conclusion states that access to CP therapy in a low-resource setting can be enabled by the novel filtration device – Hemoclear, which can easily be implemented in the ICU setting and can be used without adverse effects on the donor and the CP recipients.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: There are few issues found in the manuscript which are as follows:

·       In Discussion portion of the Abstract, “Both CXR-score… effective indicators of the treatment…” must be “Both CXR-score… effective indicators for the treatment…”.

·       In section, Study Flow Chart, the word “eligible” has been misspelled.

·       In Subpoint, Convalescent Plasma Donor Recruitment, “Trypanosoma cruzi” has been incorrectly written as “Trypanosomi cruzi”.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: The Research article establishes the mortality reduction in ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients in a low-resource setting, followed by treatment with convalescent plasma (CP) acquired via gravity filtration. The manuscript thoroughly discusses the methods involved in the study providing proper study design of the patients, data collection, convalescent plasma donor recruitment and plasma preparation procedure. The results further support the research data, illustrating the primary and secondary outcomes of the patients.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team