Dear Editor,
In response to the letter,
We are grateful to reader of paper for his interesting correspondence on our paper [1]. Actually in our paper we focused on generated framework rather than a review study. We systematically reviewed the domain papers to provide a systematic framework. In the period of review, one of the reviewers suggested the systematic review to our title. Before that, our opinion was based on the idea of and original framework rather than a review study. Finally, due to the reviewer comments and the emphasis of the reviewer and limited word count of paper, we added a systematic search in a small section of study and the majority of paper was remained to focus on technical sections and developing a framework. A search was only a small step in this paper and some features of systematic review protocols were not reported or not followed by authors.

At last, we acknowledge that his suggestions represent a meaningful insight to improve the search strategy of the paper, but it was not affected the findings of study in technical and computational viewpoints. About other points, our reviewers studied the paper and accept our best of knowledge revisions in a long period of time.  It seems that the paper was a scoping review not a completely systematic review.