FROM : Current Status of Chinese Medicine Nursing in Japan: A Narrative Literature Review

Reviewer comments -1

Yes, I believe this is a useful study to examine the need for Chinese medicine in nursing education. In the results, there is mention of 50 papers, but I think that the seven papers analyzed should be described here. In Discussion, It contains leaps and bounds that are not based on the results of this study. It is best not to make leaps and bounds in discussions. In Conclusion, the description is not based on the results of this study.

Response-1

The seven papers analyzed have been numbered 6 to 12 in the References. In accordance with the global standard of manuals for literature review, such as scoping reviews, the rules require listing of the analyzed papers in the References. Additional detailed information on the contents of the seven papers is provided in the Results. The Discussion has been improved in response to your suggestions. The purpose of the Conclusion is to elucidate what was learned from the research, and provide an answer to the questions raised, based on what was verified and examined in the research. As the Conclusion is not intended to be a summary of the paper, we have ascertained that its contents do not overlap with the Abstract. The Conclusion has been improved in response to your suggestions.

Reviewer Comments-2

This is an important paper in researching the unknown field of Chinese medicine nursing. As well as a Japanese database, did you not search in other databases, for example, PubMed? As it is few documents, you should report each background in detail. It is advisable to list the seven analysed papers and the references separately.

Response-2

This study concerns the current status of Chinese medicine nursing in Japan, and we believe that it is sufficient to utilize Ichushi-Web, a comprehensive database that covers all Japanese literature. In addition, as this study revealed, only seven papers on Chinese medicine nursing in Japan have been published in Ichushi-Web, and no papers in PubMed. The seven papers analyzed have been numbered 6 to 12 in the References. In accordance with the global standard of manuals for literature review, such as scoping reviews, the rules require listing of the analyzed papers in the References. Additional detailed information on the contents of the seven papers is provided in the Results.

Reviewer Comments-3

This paper is concise and clearly expressed. Introduction section of this manuscript. Background of this study is very broad, so I recommend add to write its detail. As it is few documents, you should report each background in detail.

Response-3

We have improved the introduction as much as possible based on your suggestions.