PREreview del Environmental Management for Raising Resilient Kids: A Practical Guide for Parents, Educators, and Professionals

The work is a thorough, user-friendly summary of resilience literature aimed at practitioners rather than new empirical research. It efficiently combines proven principles (for example, authoritative parenting and protective variables such as secure attachments) into practical recommendations, making it useful for both parents and educators. The work is clearly organised from infancy to adolescence, with evidence-based references.

Major issues

1. Scope: The title “Environmental Management for Raising Resilient Kids: A Practical Guide for Parents, Educators, and Professionals” gives the impression of an ecological focus, while the work is tailored towards the psychological or social factors affecting the resilience of children. The topic may need to be refined, or the work expanded to contain the management of the physical environment.

2. Scientific Rigor: Although this work is well organized and easy to understand, it lacks the rigor to be classified as a scientific paper/article. Scientific articles broadly follow the format of Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. The absence of this makes it hard to peer-review this work as a scientific paper. Adding case studies or surveys will address this issue. The current work is rather organised in the form of a book, a manual, or a blog

3. References: The majority of the core resilience references used to back up the ideas are from the 1980s, which is a long time ago. More recent evidence would help understand resilience in the new technological age. Also, references 57 to 85 are not relevant to the work and should therefore be removed.

Minor issues

1. Keywords: Some key words used in the abstract, like “children” and “resilience,” are quite vague. Words like “parenting strategies” and “protective factors” can be used.

2. Figures/visuals: There are no visuals present in the work. Diagrams for comparing factors or resilience models following the discussion on models would be a good addition to the work

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The author declares that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.