Unfortunately, I will not be able to give any clear suggestions on reviewers’ comments related to revising a manuscript since I have not perused the manuscript in its entirety. It would be best if you consult your supervisors and colleagues for a definitive answer to this. I can only give you some generic guidance on what the comments mean and how you can handle them:
As per Reviewer 1's comment, the authors need to justify the sample size. For this, you can refer to A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how, which gives good details regarding sample size calculations for pilot studies. Also, GPower3 is a good software to calculate sample size.
Reviewer 2 is of the opinion that since no sample size has been determined at the start of the study, it may have an impact on the primary/secondary outcomes of the study; any statistical analyses used for calculation of the significance of the results obtained will not hold good since the initial sample size has not been calculated. Hence, the reviewer suggests that you should include a statement in the manuscript saying that the significance you have found relating to your outcome measurement (efficacy of the protocol or proposed technique) and the comparisons thereof is exploratory and not confirmative. I am assuming that the hypothesis and the level of significance were not established a priori and hence the reviewer is suggesting this.
Related reading:
