Physical Activity Levels of 1053 Omani 4th Grade Children: The Importance of Gender and Sport Team Participation in Achieving 60 Minutes of Daily Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is very well written with a good rationale developed for the current study, particularly for the focus on middle childhood. 

Suggestions for the discussion:

Perhaps future research should assess sedentary behaviour objectively like in this study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5116050/

This European paper has recommendations for school-based interventions to increase physical activity and implications and may be useful in the discussion:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2020.535705/full

I see that data collection took place in 2017. It should be noted this was before coronavirus restrictions as these may have changed level of physical activity.

Limitations of the study should be considered e.g. data was collected during school and non-school hours in term time. Would results be generalisable to children's physical activity at weekends or in school holidays?

Author Response

The paper is very well written with a good rationale developed for the current study, particularly for the focus on middle childhood. 

• Thank you for your thoughts and your time reviewing our work. It was a unique time for us being in Oman.

Suggestions for the discussion:

Perhaps future research should assess sedentary behaviour objectively like in this study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5116050/

• Yes, valid point. Thank you for your comment. We acknowledge that the Polar Active Watch cannot capture true sedentary behaviors due to the lack of ability to assess a posture. Thus, we discussed this point as one of the study limitations and recommended a future direction.

This European paper has recommendations for school-based interventions to increase physical activity and implications and may be useful in the discussion:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2020.535705/full

• We improved our discussion section with more discussion and a limitations section.

I see that data collection took place in 2017. It should be noted this was before coronavirus restrictions as these may have changed level of physical activity.

• We added around line 20 in the abstract to be clear “in 2017 (pre-pandemic) to not confuse anyone browsing the manuscript.

Limitations of the study should be considered e.g. data was collected during school and non-school hours in term time. Would results be generalisable to children's physical activity at weekends or in school holidays?

• We added a limitations section.

Reviewer 2 Report

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for their manuscript entitled "A Cross-Sectional Study on the Prevalence and Correlates of Objectively Measured Physical Activity Among a Large Sample of Omani Children" It is a very nice work. The readers could feel the consistency through the manuscript, which makes it easy to follow for them. I would like to highlight the high quality of the discussion, where the authors not only explain their results but they put them into an international context and make practical suggestions. However, few things should be clarified in the manuscript: 1) What does "no sports team" and "1 or more sports team" means. Please explain since it's not clear that the participants are in sports clubs or do team sports. 2) Why "<2 hours/day' vs. '2+ hours/day" were categorize as watching TV and using the computer? 3) Please add limitations of the study.

Author Response

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for their manuscript entitled "A Cross-Sectional Study on the Prevalence and Correlates of Objectively Measured Physical Activity Among a Large Sample of Omani Children" It is a very nice work. The readers could feel the consistency through the manuscript, which makes it easy to follow for them.

• Thank you for your comments, thoughts, and time reviewing our work.

I would like to highlight the high quality of the discussion, where the authors not only explain their results, but they put them into an international context and make practical suggestions.

• Again, thank you.

However, few things should be clarified in the manuscript:

1) What does "no sports team" and "1 or more sports team" means. Please explain since it's not clear that the participants are in sports clubs or do team sports.

• We added around line 124 out-of-school and (i.e., in a sport club).

2) Why "<2 hours/day' vs. '2+ hours/day" were categorize as watching TV and using the computer?

• We addressed your question in the revision. Our category cut-offs are in agreement with the American Pediatric Association's recommendation.

3) Please add limitations of the study.

• We added a limitations section.

Reviewer 3 Report

The study performed by Lochbaum et al was aimed at investigating Omani’s PA in children which is important as not many studies have been done so far.

Is there a hypothesis stated in this study?

The title is so general and confusing. Please make it in accordance with the obtained results.

It is interesting how the authors focus their attention mainly on TV watching and computer use. Is it possible that in the GCC countries just sitting time might be added?

It is important to discuss which factors make a non-inclusion environment for girls. This reviewer recommends some elegant works performed by the following authors doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66163-x; doi: 10.1155/2013/232164; doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.11.002; 10.1186/s12889-018-5472-z.

The lack of PA is attributable to factors such as local terrain barriers and social-cultural context. Please discuss.

 

Miscellaneous

 

What was the age range of the students? The authors analyzed both girls and boys, but in line 84 they just mention boys. Please clarify.

Line 89. How many Polar Bands were distributed among the schools? How was the distribution performed?

In table 1 the N(%) is somehow confusing. As “Total” does not have a percentage. Either include 100% to 1053 or remove “%” after N.

Line 238. Typo ….revealed that “the” only….

Author Response

The study performed by Lochbaum et al was aimed at investigating Omani’s PA in children which is important as not many studies have been done so far.

• Thank you for your time and thoughts. Our time in Oman was unique and enjoyable. A new life experience.

Is there a hypothesis stated in this study?

• We did not state a specific hypothesis. It seems the most hypothesis (es) are or were the majority of the children would not obtain 60 min MVPA per day, and boys > girls. It seems factual in our world. Thus, we did not state them.

The title is so general and confusing. Please make it in accordance with the obtained results.

• It was confusing for me (Marc) as well once I read you comment and our title! I hope it is better this round.

It is interesting how the authors focus their attention mainly on TV watching and computer use. Is it possible that in the GCC countries just sitting time might be added?

• The questions related to TV watching and computer use were from the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance survey questionnaire conducted by the CDC, USA, to compare with western countries.
• We understand the questions lack variety to reflect different types of screen-media uses (e.g., mobile phone); thus, we added this as one of the study limitations in the discussion. And the Polar Active Watch was used to assess the time spent in different intensity levels, which included the time spent in sedentary that potentially have sitting time.

It is important to discuss which factors make a non-inclusion environment for girls. This reviewer recommends some elegant works performed by the following authors doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66163-x; doi: 10.1155/2013/232164; doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.11.002; 10.1186/s12889-018-5472-z.

The lack of PA is attributable to factors such as local terrain barriers and social-cultural context. Please discuss.

• We improved our discussion based on your suggestion around line 324. Thank you for your suggestion.

Miscellaneous

What was the age range of the students?

• We included the age range around line 84.

The authors analyzed both girls and boys, but in line 84 they just mention boys. Please clarify.

• We had the % as well thus the missing % were girls. However, that was confusing. We made the simple change stating the number of boys and girls.

Line 89. How many Polar Bands were distributed among the schools?

• On average, we distributed 50 devices distributed to the students from each of 25 schools.
• We added more information around line 100.

How was the distribution performed?

• Explained around line 100.

In table 1 the N(%) is somehow confusing. As “Total” does not have a percentage. Either include 100% to 1053 or remove “%” after N.

• 100% included.

Line 238. Typo ….revealed that “the” only….

• Thank you. Correction made.