Response to Reviewer : Reviewer :

Detailed Response to Reviewer Comments Reviewer :

Author's response to reviews Title: Limited Referral to Nephrologists from a Tertiary Geriatric Outpatient Clinic Despite a High Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease and Anaemia Authors:

Author's response to reviews: I have made all of the changes suggested by Reviewer #1 and Reviewer #2 had no suggestions.

Author’s response to reviews Title: A comparison of multidisciplinary team residential rehabilitation with conventional outpatient care for the treatment of non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain in UK military personnel - a protocol for a randomised controlled trial Authors:

Title: A comparison of multidisciplinary team residential rehabilitation with conventional outpatient care for the treatment of non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain in UK military personnel a protocol for a randomised controlled trial Authors: Russell Coppack ([email protected]) James Bilzon ([email protected]) Andrew Wills ([email protected]) Ian McCurdie ([email protected]...

Author’s response to reviews Title: Comparison of diagnostic methods for early interproximal caries detection with nearinfrared light transillumination: An in vivo study Authors: ismail

Reviewer#1 (Reviewer 1): The introduction is pertinent to the topic addressed. The methodology can be described more clearly to respond to what the study proposes. We’d like to thank and express our deep gratitude to the reviewer for his/her kind concern and effort for reviewing our manuscript. We agree with the reviewer completely. Several changes were made according to reviewers’ suggestions....

Author's response to reviews Title: Effects of 3 months of short sessions of controlled whole body vibrations on the risk of falls among nursing home residents Authors:

1. Reviewer: I wonder if the authors can say 30 Hz intensity? Is the frequency related to the intensity of vibration training? Should author’s rater state 30 Hz frequency? Authors: We agree with the reviewer and we have made this amendment. 2. Reviewer: Authors cannot state that the Tinetti test showed an improvement if there was no significance. Better state: Tinetti score increased.... Author...