Next Article in Journal
Association between Campus Walkability and Affective Walking Experience, and the Mediating Role of Walking Attitude
Previous Article in Journal
Desire for Children and Distress in Women with Hereditary Cancer Syndromes
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Current Research Trends, Hotspots, and Frontiers of Physical Activity during Pregnancy: A Bibliometric Analysis

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(21), 14516; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114516
by Yanbing Zhou 1, Xian Guo 2,*, Jinhao Mu 2, Jingying Liu 2, Hongying Yang 3 and Chenxi Cai 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(21), 14516; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114516
Submission received: 10 October 2022 / Revised: 1 November 2022 / Accepted: 3 November 2022 / Published: 4 November 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review Table 1. retrieval strategy. Question marks and misprints for keywords. Consider the possibility of including a flow chart. Figure 6 and 8 are not seen correctly, it would be appropriate to improve it.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I suggest that the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Scientific Report be included as a featured document. PART F. CHAPTER 8. WOMEN WHO ARE PREGNANT OR POSTPARTUM

 

I suggest further discussion of the state of the art regarding type of physical activity, weekly frequency, specific exercises, and contraindications.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I’d like to thank the authors and the Editorial Board for the opportunity to review the paper submitted to the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. The manuscript entitled " Current research trends, hotspots and frontiers of physical activity during pregnancy: a bibliometric analysis ‘’ needs to be improved. I have the following comments to improve the manuscript: 1. Figures are illegible, difficult to interpret, please consider presenting them in a different graphic form 2. In the discussion I propose to move lines 155-167 and place them in the introduction to the article 3. References written not in accordance with the requirements set by the journal. A large part of the literature is older than the last 5 years. 4. The main perpose of the work is missing in the article. 5. The article does not add any new content

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Tkanks  to the authors for making corrections to the manuscript

Back to TopTop