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.
This paper [
The background clearly presents the nature of the context, what is already known as well as the gap in knowledge and the need to conduct this study. The objectives of the scoping review are clear. The design is presented, and the authors follow the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) Checklist.
The characteristics of the sources of evidence and eligibility criteria are provided. The authors describe all information sources in the search and present the full search strategy for at least one database.
Authors define the selection of sources of evidence, the data charting process, and all variables for which data were sought. They describe the methods used for conducting a critical appraisal of included sources of evidence, and the methods used for the synthesis of results.
Results are correctly presented and cited in their manuscript section. The authors summarize the main results of the study, discuss the limitations of the scoping review, and provide a general conclusion of the outcomes.
The authors refer to Table 4 three times in the manuscript; however, this table is not attached to the document. The same occurs with Table 3 that is referred to on page 7, second paragraph.
In relation to the PRISMA-ScR checklist, the eligibility criteria are not pointed out in the abstract section of the manuscript.
The registration number of the scoping review’s protocol is missing. The authors do not indicate if the protocol is available.
There are some typos in the manuscript, for example:
Authors use the acronym PPE (personal protective equipment) several times in the manuscript. Please indicate its meaning the first time it appears in the manuscript (page 10).
In the abstract section, the word “found” appears in a smaller size than the rest of the words.
None declared.
personal protective equipment
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews