Title: Impact of Individual and Environmental Factors on Academic Performance of Pregnant
Adolescent
Version: 4 Date: 22 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for the timely corrections.
I will make my recommendations based on my previous review.
My remarks are contained at the end of each observation as "Reviewer response" which may
be "satisfactory" or "not satisfactory"
1. In research, we generally study or research relationships, effects, impacts, influence, etc and
from the result of these we may make deductions or inferences. These inferences and deductions
are referred to as implications of the study.
In the abstract section, the authors, in the objectives sub-section wrote: “The goal of this study
was to determine the implications of environmental factors…”. It is confusing to say that the
purpose of the study is to determine implications…. Implications do not form research purposes
rather they are product of the research purpose. The authors may need to address this.
In the introduction section of the body of the study, the objective of the study was stated as:
“The current study examined the relationship between individual and environmental factors and
assessed the relationship between individual factors and the academic integration of pregnant
female students.” This is a better version of the purpose of the study.
Reviewer response: Satisfactory.
2. The purpose of the study was stated as: “The current study examined the relationship between
individual and environmental factors and assessed the relationship between individual factors
and the academic integration of pregnant female students”.
The individual factor: sexual attitude, peer attachment
Environmental factors: neighbourhood environment.
Therefore, from the purpose of the study we can derive the following specific purposes:
(a) Relationship between sexual attitude vs neighbourhood environment
(b) Relationship between peer attachment vs neighbourhood environment
(c) Relationship between sexual attitude vs academic integration (performance)
(d) Relationship between peer attachment vs academic integration (performance)
In the analysis and result presented in the study, it appears the authors omitted some specific
purposes and even included one which was not covered in the general objectives (for example:
Relationship Between Peer Attachment and Sexual Attitude).
Reviewer response: Satisfactory.
3. Key variables in the study such as sexual attitude, peer attachment, and academic integration
(or performance) were not sufficiently covered in the background. In particular, sexual attitude
and peer attachment were not mentioned nor inferred in the background of the study. This is
discomforting since the study does not have a literature review section. The authors may need
to adequately capture the state of the art of these variables in the background to justify their
inclusion in the study. Or add a literature review section.
Reviewer response: Not Satisfactory.
Remark: Unless its against the journal policy, it may be necessary to adequately capture the
state of art of the key variables in the study via a literature review. The authors have failed to
adequately capture this in the background.
4. The study defined “academic integration” in terms of “academic performance”. None of these
two terms were explained in the study and the reason(s) for approximating one from the other
was not given. The authors merely presented a reference to a previous study as a justification
for their action. This is unacceptable especially given that the variables in questions appear to
be major (dependent) variables of the study. A clear explanation of the variables is necessary
and the relationship between the variables should be highlighted for proper guidance.
Reviewer response: Not Satisfactory.
Remark: Its fine that the authors have removed the controversial "academic integration",
however, academic performance and its state of the art was not adequately covered in the
background especially as it relates to the population/sample (teenagers/pregnant teenagers in
Nigeria ) of the study. Second, the measure adopted to measure academic performance in this
study is very unclear. The school records of the participants could have  easily serve as a measure
of their academic performance. The whole of section 2.4 (Study Variables) where academic
performance measure was discussed appears greatly confusing and complex.
5. A general revision would be beneficial.