Health-related Quality of Life and Its Predictors among Patients Diagnosed with Diabetes Mellitus in a Tertiary Health Facility in Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria

Dear Editor, The study of Ehwarieme et al.[1] titled “Health-related Quality of Life and its Predicators among Patients Diagnosed with Diabetes Mellitus in a Tertiary Health Facility, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria” has been evaluated by the reviewers. The introduction highlights the importance of psychological aspects, but it does not explain how they relate to glycemic control, self-care, and results. The logical connection between the problem and the goals is weakened by the lack of information regarding how health-related quality of life will be measured. Although a descriptive cross-sectional design does not allow for determination of causality or directionality, the findings may still indicate potential associations and predictors. Details of the study setting—including the diabetic clinic, available services, and catchment population—are clearly described. However, the sampling strategy may introduce selection bias, and the issue of non-response has not been adequately addressed. External validity is limited by the sample size of N = 200 from a single tertiary care hospital. This is not acknowledged. Patients with serious conditions who do not meet the defined exclusion criteria will be included in the study. The validity of the tool was not explicitly stated in this study. Concerns about bias in data collection are raised by the possibility of social desirability bias, perceived coercion, and improper method description when nurses from the same wards administered the instruments. The study lacked hypothesis testing, the analysis is inconsistent, and multinomial regression suggests analytical inference. In the result part, the equal distribution of males and females may not accurately reflect the real gender distribution of diabetic patients in the general population, which affects the representativeness of the findings. Some predictive results, such as the effect of family type, show wide confidence intervals and lack statistical significance, indicating uncertainty in the strength of these associations. In conclusion, a cross-sectional study is unable to make clear conclusions, but the paragraph suggests interventions and tangential connections. The claim of poor quality of life is weak because it lacks reporting magnitudes, cutoff points, or comparison groups. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflict of interest There are no conflicts of interest.