Next Article in Journal
An End-to-End Lightweight Multi-Scale CNN for the Classification of Lung and Colon Cancer with XAI Integration
Previous Article in Journal
Experimental and Numerical Analysis of a Novel Cycloid-Type Rotor versus S-Type Rotor for Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Digital Twin Models for Personalised and Predictive Medicine in Ophthalmology

Technologies 2024, 12(4), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12040055
by Miruna-Elena Iliuţă 1,*, Mihnea-Alexandru Moisescu 1, Simona-Iuliana Caramihai 1, Alexandra Cernian 1, Eugen Pop 1, Daniel-Ioan Chiş 1 and Traian-Costin Mitulescu 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Technologies 2024, 12(4), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12040055
Submission received: 28 February 2024 / Revised: 4 April 2024 / Accepted: 12 April 2024 / Published: 18 April 2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper researches a digital twin models for personalized and predictive medicine in ophthalmology, give an architectural framework for digital twin, risks and vulnerabilities. The research of this paper has some significance, but there are many shortcomings in this paper, which are as follows:

(1) The specific principle is not clearly explained by the author about digital twin models for personalized and predictive medicine. The author only gives a general description, and it is suggested that the author give a detailed principle and method according to the research object.

(2) in part 3.2, the authors describe the vulnerabilities at the digital twin level, how to improve the method? What are the specific measures?

(3) in part 5 and 6, although the author gives some analysis and results, there is no corresponding model in the method section.

(4) The author introduces a deep learning method, but does not give a specific model, and suggests that the author give a suitable model that conforms to the method proposed in this paper.

(5) This paper lacks comparative validation of research methods.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The expression of the paper is relatively good, but the description of some sentence needs further improvement

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please, refere to the attached document for comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language


Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for considering the remarks and integrating them in extensive re-work. 

Back to TopTop