This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIRx Med, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://med.jmirx.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
Comments and Responses by the Authors [
Methods
Describe the study [
Move the highlighted (in the reviewed manuscript) content under Data Collection Procedures to a new subsection under subsection heading Study Population (see comments in the reviewed manuscript)
The highlighted content should be under a new subsection heading Study Design
Provide content on another two subsection headings:
Sampling Techniques
Sample Size
Separate content under Data Collection Procedure into two new subsection headings
Data Collection Tool and Procedure
Data Analysis and Management
Move Table 1 to Analyses & Results section
Provide content under two new subsection headings:
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Ethics Considerations
Authors: The sections mentioned in this review [
Inclusion and exclusion criteria were combined with sample size, as we described how we got the final sample and why we included respondents (and why not).
Abstract
Do not begin a sentence with abbreviation of figure
Use past tense under Methods (eg, consider ‘used’ in lieu of ‘uses’)
See comments in the reviewed manuscript
Introduction
Use physicians in lieu of doctors
Use health care providers not other medical professionals
Keep in-text citation to the end of sentence
Add health information management professionals among the key stakeholders
Consider reducing the whole of section 2 (Theoretical Background) to 1-2 paragraphs and keep it within the Introduction section just before your study objective. This is to reduce readers’ boredom.
Compress the content under research models and hypotheses
Results
Make your findings more visible here
Make your writing more readable to known and unknown readers
Discussion
Plausible and insightful discussion but not a reflection of the content under the Results. Make the Results section more readable and meaningful to your audience.
Figure
Use Fig not Figure
Acknowledgement
It is scientifically necessary that you acknowledge the numerous (n=107) participants, who are the major stakeholders in your research.
Reference
List at least 3 authors before et al
Follow the Referencing Style consistently
Others
Use participants not respondents
Authors: We adjusted this accordingly.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper on the lesser known topic of information and communications technology ambidexterity. The paper is well cited, uses appropriate methods, and discusses the concepts and findings in a clear and thorough manner. The paper should appeal to a broad audience. It is a good example of the underrepresented information and communications technology–centered literature in health care.
Authors: We would like to thank this reviewer for these kind words [
Well thought out study design with specific hypotheses and methods of analysis spelled out. Interesting conclusions drawn out that would be fruitful for further discussion and analysis to replicate on a broader sample of hospital systems outside of the current reviewed sites.
Authors: We would also like to thank this reviewer for these kind words [