Manuscript ID number:

330436

Title of paper:
Coagulation disorders in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy

Reviewer 1
Title & Abstract
1. Do the title and abstract cover the main aspect of the work?
The title and abstract cover the main aspect of the work

2. Does the introduction provide background and information relevant to the study?
The Introduction provide background and information relevant
The objective need to be added

Material and Methods

3. Are the methods clear and replicable? Do all the results presented match the methods described?
The methods did not clear
What was the inclusion and exclusion criteria
Definition of COVID-19 how they were diagnosed.
How the analysis was conducted
The ethical approval?
How was the sampling methods

Results
4. If relevant are the results novel? Does the study provide an advance in the field? Is the data plausible?
The results give insight in limited sample size

Discussion
5. Do the findings described by the author correlate with the results? Are the findings relevant?
In the discussion related to results

Conclusion
6. Do the conclusions correlate to the results found?
The conclusion should correlate to the results

"Knowledge of clinical and laboratory parameters with prognosis utility can be extremely valuable in the management of
COVID-19-infected pregnant women, establishing the best treatment options, balancing maternal and foetal/neonatal risks
and benefits, and avoiding useless interventions. A better understanding of COVID-19-related coagulopathy in pregnant
women may also be useful to guide treatment recommendations. Pregnancy may be a risk factor for coagulopathy.: this
looked like the review article conclusion, not the retrospective study

Figures & Tables

7. If the author has provided figures and tables are the figures and tables clear and legible? Are the figures free from
unnecessary modification?
Figures and tables clear
8. Does the paper raise any concerns?
The paper should be added according to STROBE checklist for observational study https://www.equator-
network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe/

Competing interest
9. Do any of the authors' competing interests raise concerns about the validity of the study i.e. have the authors'
competing interests created a bias in the reporting of the results and conclusions?
the authors have no competing interests raise concerns

English editing
10. Do you think the manuscript requires English editing to correct the grammar or flow?
No

Recommendations to the Editor

Additional comments
My comments are
1. In the discussion should be added the characteristic of COVID 19 mild moderate severe or critical based on laboratory and
clinical severity . DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.12.076
2. What were the comorbidity of subject ? should be discussed and compared
3. There was no known the thrombofilia subject (because no testing about it) should be added as the limitation of study,
beside the limited sample size and no causal effect relationship observed.
4. The pathophisiology of covid-19 and coagulopathy should be more elaborate DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/med.v8i2.3444
Reviewer 2
Title & Abstract
1. Do the title and abstract cover the main aspect of the work?
The article "Coagulation disorders in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy" from Pelin et al is on a very
interesting topic. Overall the article is written appropriately but some shortcomings should be clarified:
Abstract:
Kindly explain the abbreviations APTT, PT, INR in the abstract.
I cannot follow the first line of the result section "Our results indicated that none patients had severe evolution of the SARS-
CoV-2 infection and did not require transfer to the ICU" - please make clearer.
The results are hard to follow; please make the sentences simple and clear.
Please make the conclusion section to the point.

2. Does the introduction provide background and information relevant to the study?
Introduction:
Please write clearly what are the existing gaps on this topic and what is already published on this topic?
Add your study aim and objective in this section.

Material and Methods

3. Are the methods clear and replicable? Do all the results presented match the methods described?
Material and Methods:
The sample size is very small (24) - please explain how can we draw conclusions from such a small sample size?
How were the patients recruited for the study?
How was the data analyzed?
What statistical tests were applied?

Results
4. If relevant are the results novel? Does the study provide an advance in the field? Is the data plausible?
Results:
Figure 1, Please mention the number (n) along with the frequency
Figure 2, what type of correlation is used here?
Figure 3, what type of data does it show? Why are there some values and text in a large font?
Figure 7, the font size is very small; kindly make it more readable
The number of figures is very large; please add some of the unnecessary figures - like those showing frequency - to a
supplementary file.

Discussion
5. Do the findings described by the author correlate with the results? Are the findings relevant?
Discussion:
- The discussion section lacks comparison with the up-to-date literature,
- please add limitations of the current study.

Conclusion
6. Do the conclusions correlate to the results found?
The conclusions are in accordance with the results but
- the sample size is too small to draw conclusions.

Figures & Tables

7. If the author has provided figures and tables are the figures and tables clear and legible? Are the figures free from
unnecessary modification?
 Figure 1, please mention the number (n) along with the frequency
Figure 2, what type of correlation is used here?
Figure 3, what type of data does it show? Why are there some values and text in a large font?
Figure 7, the font size is very small: please make it more readable
The number of figures is very large, please add some unnecessary figures - like those showing frequency - to a
supplementary file.

8. Does the paper raise any concerns?

- There is no information in the method section regarding the statistical methods used.

Competing interest
9. Do any of the authors' competing interests raise concerns about the validity of the study i.e. have the authors'
competing interests created a bias in the reporting of the results and conclusions?
No, there are no competing interests raised.

English editing
10. Do you think the manuscript requires English editing to correct the grammar or flow?
Yes

Recommendations to the Editor

Additional comments
No additional comments

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)