Research on the Structure and Characteristics of Adolescent Physical Health Policy in China Based on Policy Text Tool
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Congratulations on the research and interesting results. The obtained results provide a complete and thorough assessment of the results of youth politics in a specific country. The obtained data were carefully processed, interesting conclusions were drawn, and prospects for further research were given.
At the same time, there are several issues with the manuscript that require further resolution.
1. Perhaps more statistical data should be provided in the introduction on the physical health of young people in China
2. It is necessary to more detail the logic of the search, taking into account the given keywords (according to which criteria they were selected, which criteria were used to create the most complete search, which guarantees that the given search words cover all elements, when exactly the search was given, etc.)
2.methods (in particular point 2.2) should be described more precisely, avoiding a very general description of specific methods
3. Given the large volume of Table 2, it should be given in its entirety in the appendices
4. It is worth pointing out the limitations of this study
5. In our opinion, the conclusions should be directly cited suggestions for the implementation of adolescent physical health policy.
Author Response
Date:17 May 2023
Manuscript Number: Sustainability-2372799
Title of Article: Research on the structure and characteristics of adolescent physical health policy in China based on policy text tool
Name of the Corresponding Author: Xinyu Ma
Email Address of the Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Dear Reviewer 1,
Thank you for your response to my manuscript
Your comments and those of the reviewers were highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. In the following pages are our point-by-point responses to each of the comments of the reviewers.
We are uploading (a) our point-by-point response to the comments (below) (cover letter to Editors and reviewers), (b) an updated manuscript with yellow highlighting indicating changes, and (c) a clean updated manuscript without highlights (PDF main document).
Specific Responses:
Response to Reviewers:
Thank you very much for taking your valuable time to participate in the review of my manuscript and for your efforts on my manuscript.
Reviewer#1, Comment # 1: Perhaps more statistical data should be provided in the introduction on the physical health of young people in China
Author response: Respected reviewer thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. Your suggestions made a huge improvement in our research paper. According to your comment, we added data on the physical fitness of Chinese adolescents needed for the background of the article to the introduction section. All the changes are marked in yellow in the revised manuscript for your comments.
Author action: In the revised version, we added statistical data on adolescent physical fitness to the introduction and added references (see page 1, page 2, and page 18, lines 44-49, and lines 592-600).
Reviewer#1, Comment # 2: It is necessary to more detail the logic of the search, taking into account the given keywords (according to which criteria they were selected, which criteria were used to create the most complete search, which guarantees that the given search words cover all elements, when exactly the search was given, etc.)
Author response: Respected reviewer thank you again for your valuable comments. According to your suggestion, we have written and modified the original search strategy in detail, including the specific search strategy, search time. You can see the results of the modifications on page 3, lines 99-106. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In Subjects and Methods, line 99, the following sentence should be changed: The database searches were completed in September 2022 and were conducted according to the following keywords: (TS=("Youth" OR "Adolescent" OR "Teenagers" OR "Young" OR "Young people" OR "Teens" OR "Children" OR "Youth’s") AND TS=("Physical health" OR "Physical fitness" OR "Sports" OR "School sports")).
Reviewer#1, Concern # 3: Methods (in particular point 2.2) should be described more precisely, avoiding a very general description of specific methods
Author response: We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. According to your comments, we have precisely added and described two research methods, as described on page 4, lines 128-158. All changes are marked in yellow in the revised manuscript and references have been added, lines 621-626 and 635-638.
Author action: In Research and Methods, lines 128-136, lines 152-158, the following sentence should be added: (1) The content analysis method is based on the assumption that the text under study are a rich database and has the potential to reveal a number of features and patterns[16]. Content analysis is often defined as the interpretation of the hidden content within a text, which is the process of parsing the text, classifying it into relevant groups of categories and considering the relationship of the participating subjects to the context[17]. Because of its widespread use, this method is considered efficient in both qualitative and quantitative research, while it is important to note that the terminology of the content analysis method is distinct in the qualitative and quantitative literature, which can lead to confusion for some researchers [18]. (2) Social network analysis emphasizes the importance of structure as a way to characterize the social environment [23]. Social network analysis can be applied in many concepts and domains, be it individuals, communities, events, or even countries. Individual relationships between social networks affect the positions and lines in the network structure, and the main task of this approach in social sciences is to explore the overall shapes and connections between networks using visual graphs, positional relationships and two-dimensional views [24].
Reviewer#1, Concern # 4: Given the large volume of Table 2, it should be given in its entirety in the appendices
Author response: Dear Reviewers, after your valuable comments, we have included Figure 2 in its entirety in the Appendix.
Author action: Figure 2 has been placed into the appendix and a revised manuscript will be submitted with the appendix upon re-submission.
Reviewer#1, Concern # 5: It is worth pointing out the limitations of this study
Author response: Dear reviewers, we have included a section on page 16 of the manuscript: 6. Limitations. The limitations section of the revised manuscript addresses some of the limitations and shortcomings of this paper. All changes are marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: The limitations are added on page 16, lines 521-532. The following sentence should be added: In the process of analyzing the 12 policies, we must acknowledge certain limitations in the study. Firstly, the reliance on policy text analysis as the primary method may overlook the nuances and complexities that exist beyond the written policy documents. Implementation gaps and discrepancies between policy intent and on-ground practices may not be adequately captured through this approach. Furthermore, this study focuses only on the physical health benefits of exercise in the policy text and may overlook other beneficial effects of exercise on adolescent children as they grow up, such as mental health, moral health, and social relationships. Lastly, the research's generalizability may be limited to the specific timeframe and geographical context in which the policy texts were analyzed, as policy frameworks and priorities can evolve over time and differ across regions.
Reviewer#1, Concern # 6: In our opinion, the conclusions should be directly cited suggestions for the implementation of adolescent physical health policy.
Author response: Dear Reviewers, We sincerely thank you for your suggestions on our research paper, which have further enhanced our paper. According to your suggestion, we have streamlined the conclusion section by adding direct recommendations for youth physical fitness policies and removing some of the original content. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we have streamlined and added direct cited suggestions for the implementation of adolescent physical health policy in the conclusion section and removed the original content (See page 17, lines 541 - 568).
Sincerely,
Xinyu Ma
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Some minor observations:
- "Sport" is listed in the set of keywords below the abstract, but it is not mentioned in the abstract itself.
- Line 29: Full stop shouldn't go before the reference. Also, is this a direct quote? It reads as such.
- Line 32: Shouldn't "chest circumference" be "waist circumference"? This is normally a key indicator for health, as in the wait to hip relationship for excess fatty tissue.
- Myopia should be defined for the reader, as this is a lesser known concept (compared with obesity).
- Some critical perspectives are needed on the value of sport at times. For instance, some sports can lead to spinal deformations, while an overweight body type could help some athletes in certain positions (as in the sport of rugby).
- Strange presentation of author names, e.g., "Li,Q" Q. Li would work better in the English form.
- Line 77: "This paper tries to..." is too indirect. The paper should promise to do something, not try to do something.
- Subject and methods: In this case, the "subjects" do not exists, as you have not used participants.
- A reference to the main website used would be most helpful for future research projects on China.
- Social Network Analysis: What is the theoretical framework behind this method? Is your work underpinned by any theoretical ideas?
- Is physical health the only benefit to sport? mental health is mentioned towards the end of the article, as you note the lack of policy documents on this important topic.
- Throughout the article, you should try to consider how sport, physical education and broader forms of physical culture / body culture relate to one another.
- Page 12: "Inadequate" considering China's vast population?
- In addition to the content analysis and quantitative approaches taken in this study, I would suggest mentioning the potential for qualitative research studies of policy documents around this topic.
Thanks in advance for your efforts.
Some of the errors identified above relate to the English language and presentation. Here are a few other observations:
Affiliations
Should the "School of Marxist" be "the School of Marxism"?
- Line 11: Strange extra spacing
- Page 7: Key words or keywords? Try to be consistent with your presentation.
- Table 2: Please check for the numerous punctuation errors
Author Response
Date:17 May 2023
Manuscript Number: Sustainability-2372799
Title of Article: Research on the structure and characteristics of adolescent physical health policy in China based on policy text tool
Name of the Corresponding Author: Xinyu Ma
Email Address of the Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Dear Reviewer 2,
Thank you for your response to my manuscript
Your comments and those of the reviewers were highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. In the following pages are our point-by-point responses to each of the comments of the reviewers.
We are uploading (a) our point-by-point response to the comments (below) (cover letter to Editors and reviewers), (b) an updated manuscript with yellow highlighting indicating changes, and (c) a clean updated manuscript without highlights (PDF main document).
Specific Responses:
Response to Reviewers:
Thank you very much for taking your valuable time to participate in the review of my manuscript and for your efforts on my manuscript.
Reviewer#2, Concern # 1: "Sport" is listed in the set of keywords below the abstract, but it is not mentioned in the abstract itself.
Author response: Respected reviewer thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions. According to your suggestion, we reorganized the keywords and deleted “sports policy”, while we added the word "China" as a keyword. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we have modified the keywords by removing “sports policy”, and adding "China" in keywords (see page 1, lines 26-27).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 2: Line 29: Full stop shouldn't go before the reference. Also, is this a direct quote? It reads as such.
Author response: Dear reviewers, we appreciate your correction of the incorrect formatting in our manuscript. We believe that now the manuscript is in a better condition and we hope that there are no mistakes regarding format. The deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we have removed the full stop before the reference. (See page 1, line 31).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 3: Line 32: Shouldn't "chest circumference" be "waist circumference"? This is normally a key indicator for health, as in the wait to hip relationship for excess fatty tissue.
Author response: Dear reviewers, thank you again for pointing out the errors in the nomenclature of our manuscript, we apologize for the translation of "waist circumference" to "chest circumference", and we have corrected the incorrect translation. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, We changed the word " chest circumference" to "waist circumference". (See page 1, line 35).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 4: Myopia should be defined for the reader, as this is a lesser known concept (compared with obesity)
Author response: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful suggestion and agree that it would be useful to defined the myopia for the reader, however, such an explanation is beyond the scope of our paper, which aims only to show that the physical health of Chinese adolescents is declining and that myopia is only mentioned in the introduction as a consequence of this decline. Nevertheless, we recognize this limitation should be mentioned in the paper, so we added the following sentence “In particular, myopia, a type of refractive error, has reached a staggering 85% of myopia and high myopia among 16-18 year olds in China since 2013”. All changes are marked in yellow in the revised manuscript and references.
Author action: In the revised version, we have added an introduction to explain the concept of myopia and the current status of myopia among Chinese youth (see page 1, lines 41-43, page 18, lines 588-589).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 5: Some critical perspectives are needed on the value of sport at times. For instance, some sports can lead to spinal deformations, while an overweight body type could help some athletes in certain positions (as in the sport of rugby).
Author response: We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We have added a paragraph to the discussion section of the manuscript with some critical points about the value of sports to support the idea that sometimes sports can have a negative impact on the physical health of young people. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we have added content for "It is important to note that while it is right to promote sports to help adolescent and children improve their physical health, it does not mean that all youth and children need to be physically active, as some sports can lead to developmental injuries that can hinder normal physical development and make it difficult for them to make lifelong physical progress. Also, there are some adolescents who need a specific body type or height to help them reach some of their goals, such as rugby players who need to be overweight and gymnasts who need a lower height” in the section 5, discussion (see page 16, lines 514-520).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 6: Strange presentation of author names, e.g., "Li,Q" Q. Li would work better in the English form.
Author response: We appreciate the reviewers' comments on the strange expression of the authors' names, however, the expression “Yuting Hu” is valid in China, and if it is expressed as “Yu, H”, the name will become another person's name, so we will keep the original author name format.
Author action: In the revised version, we have not changed the format of the author's name.
Reviewer#2, Concern # 7: "This paper tries to..." is too indirect. The paper should promise to do something, not try to do something.
Author response: Dear reviewer thank you again for highlighting the improvements we need to do. We have replaced the words pointed out. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line. Thank you again for highlighting the misunderstandings in our manuscript.
Author action: We updated the manuscript by replacing "tries" with "promises". (See page 2, line 87)
Reviewer#2, Concern # 8: Subject and methods: In this case, the "subjects" do not exists, as you have not used participants.
Author response: Respected reviewer thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. Your suggestions made a huge improvement in our research paper. According to your comment, we have modified the title of Section 2 and Section 2.1. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we changed “Subjects and Methods” to “Data collection and Methods”, and changed the “Research Subjects” to “Research Data (page 2, lines 90-91).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 9: A reference to the main website used would be most helpful for future research projects on China.
Author response: Respected reviewer thank you again for your valuable comments. We agree with the reviewer that a reference to the main website used would be most helpful for future research. However, we believe that it is feasible to include the searched database or website in the reference. Nevertheless, we recognize this limitation should be mentioned in the paper, so we thought displaying the website or database link in the searched method is a more reasonable way. We added the policy search site to the search methodology and supplemented the content. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we have added the policy search site on page 3, lines 115-119 “Policy search site: (1) National Sports Administration Sports Policy and Regulations Document Retrieval Platform: http://sport.org.cn/search/system/. (2) State Council Policy Document Library: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengcewenjianku/index.htm. (3) Ministry of Education Policy Document Library: http://www.moe.gov.cn/was5/web/search?channelid=239993” (see page 3, lines 115-119).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 10: Social Network Analysis: What is the theoretical framework behind this method? Is your work underpinned by any theoretical ideas?
Author response: Dear reviewers, thank you again for your comments on the research methods of our manuscript. For the theoretical framework and theoretical foundation behind the social network analysis approach, we have modified the content in the social network analysis approach and added information about the theoretical basis and framework behind it. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: We updated the manuscript by add the theoretical basis for the content of the social network analysis method on page 4, lines 152-158.
Reviewer#2, Concern # 11: Is physical health the only benefit to sport? mental health is mentioned towards the end of the article, as you note the lack of policy documents on this important topic.
Author response: Dear reviewers, Thank you for reviewing our manuscript and bringing up the deficiencies in the manuscript. In response to the question "Is physical health the only benefit to sport?", we recognize the shortcomings shown in this issue. However, the focus of this paper is on the structure and characteristics of China's adolescent physical health policies at the current stage and the future direction of adolescent physical health policy provision. Therefore, we have included in the limitations of the article an answer about whether sports is the only benefit for physical health, with certain explanations. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript. Thank you again for pointing out the shortcomings in our manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we included a paragraph in the limitations to explain the reviewer's question about "Is physical health the only benefit to sport?" (See page 16, lines 502-505).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 12: Throughout the article, you should try to consider how sport, physical education and broader forms of physical culture / body culture relate to one another.
Author response: Dear reviewers, thank you so much for your questions on our original manuscript. We have added a paragraph to the discussion section on the relationship between sport, physical education and broader forms of physical culture, and explored the future development of Chinese youth between sport, physical education and physical culture in the context of youth physical health.
Author action: In the revised version, we have added the corresponding content in the discussion section (See page 16, lines 501-513).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 13: Page 12: "Inadequate" considering China's vast population?
Author response: Dear reviewers, thank you for pointing out the problems in our manuscript, We recognized that the use of the word "Inadequate" in the original draft was clearly inappropriate, so we removed "Inadequate" and added a sentence explaining the difference in the number of uses of sportsmanship and mental health versus other policy tools. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we have changed the original statement to “The number of policy tools for sportsmanship and mental health was used less frequently compared to other policy tools” (see page 12, lines 372-373).
Reviewer#2, Concern # 14: In addition to the content analysis and quantitative approaches taken in this study, I would suggest mentioning the potential for qualitative research studies of policy documents around this topic.
Author response: Dear reviewers, thank you for pointing out the shortcomings of our original manuscript. However, it is worth stating that this paper uses a qualitative research approach, and the coding and analysis of the content of the policy documents was conducted using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. Therefore, we have added a discussion section on the need to discuss the policy components of qualitative methods to study adolescent physical fitness. Thank you again for your suggestions on this issue. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we added to the discussion section the potential for qualitative research on policy documents on the topic of adolescent physical health. (See page 16, lines 490-500)
Reviewer#2, Concern # 15: Should the "School of Marxist" be "the School of Marxism"?
Author response: Dear Reviewer, thank you for your detailed review of our unit, we have made changes in error. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we formatted the corresponding author's affiliation according to the suggestions given by the reviewers. (See page 1, line 6)
Reviewer#2, Concern # 16: Line 11: Strange extra spacing
Author response: Dear Reviewer, Thank you for checking the formatting errors in our article, we have corrected such issues. The deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, we have removed the incorrect spacing. (See page 1, line11)
Reviewer#2, Concern # 17: Page 7: Key words or keywords? Try to be consistent with your presentation.
Author response: Dear Reviewers, thank you again for pointing out the errors in the spelling of words in our manuscript. We changed all the “keywords” to “key words” and rechecked the spelling of the whole text. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript.
Author action: In the revised version, we fixed 21 spelling errors and changed all of them to "key words". (See page 7-8, lines 264-288)
Reviewer#2, Concern # 18: Table 2: Please check for the numerous punctuation errors
Author response: Dear reviewer, thank you for pointing out the punctuation errors in Table 2, and we have corrected all punctuation marks in Table 2 in response to your comments. The modified study is marked in yellow in the revised manuscript, and the deleted original text is marked in red font and delete line.
Author action: In the revised version, 2e fixed 15 errors in Table 2 regarding punctuation, word spelling, and line breaks. (See appendix).
Sincerely,
Yuting Hu
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
A laborious, well-grounded and structured research.
Author Response
Date:17 May 2023
Manuscript Number: Sustainability-2372799
Title of Article: Research on the structure and characteristics of adolescent physical health policy in China based on policy text tool
Name of the Corresponding Author: Xinyu Ma
Email Address of the Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Dear Reviewer 3,
Thank you for your response to my manuscript.
Response to Reviewers:
Thank you very much for taking your valuable time to participate in the review of my manuscript and for your efforts on my manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for answer and all clarifications. I find it appropriate. Congratulations with great result!
Kind regards,
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for returning the manuscript for review. I am very pleased to read your professional response to the two sets of peer review, which show best practice in terms of the two-level structure of response and action. We done for considering each comment and suggestion in detail.
After checking through the manuscript, I am happy to recommend this article for review. It just needs some English language edits, as there are some issues with spacing, upper/lower case and punctuation. This is one of the issues I pointed out with the Chinese names, which can of course be written surname, initial, but with a space after the comma. Please work on these errors with the copy editors.
All the best with the next steps of your research.
As above - there are issues with extra spacing, lack of a single space, lower case when there should be upper case and a lack of space after some commas. There errors are numerous, so I would suggest working with a native speaker to assist you.
