Analysis of the COVID-19 Lockdown Impact on Biological Parameters and Physical Performance in Football Players

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The main question of the research is not fully expressed. The subject can be original. However, the results do not match the results. The contribution of the subject to the field is not directly stated. It appears that an indirect effect on health has been studied. For methodology,  it should be discussed again according to the measured parameters and the tables made. The results are not consistent with the findings. Results should be rearranged according to the findings. Some data in the tables appear inconsistent. The data in some tables cannot be clearly understood.

The findings of this study were based on blood parameters, and the results were written with a social content. Other results were expected based on the findings.

There must be an error in the BMI values in Table 1. Since the length does not change:

   If BMI = 27.4 for body weight 85.6 kg

  Is it possible to have a BMI value of 24.3 when the body weight is 87.0 kg.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We have made appropriate amendments to the manuscript following your suggestions.

Reviewer: 1

The main question of the research is not fully expressed. The subject can be original. However, the results do not match the results. The contribution of the subject to the field is not directly stated. It appears that an indirect effect on health has been studied.

We thank the Referee for the careful review of our article. We have tried to make the purpose of the research more understandable by suitably modulating the final part of the Introduction.

For methodology, it should be discussed again according to the measured parameters and the tables made. The results are not consistent with the findings. Results should be rearranged according to the findings. Some data in the tables appear inconsistent. The data in some tables cannot be clearly understood.

The findings of this study were based on blood parameters, and the results were written with a social content. Other results were expected based on the findings.

There must be an error in the BMI values in Table 1. Since the length does not change:

   If BMI = 27.4 for body weight 85.6 kg

  Is it possible to have a BMI value of 24.3 when the body weight is 87.0 kg.

Regarding the data reported in the Table, the referee is right as the weight value in T0 of the post-Covid season was wrong. We have now corrected this typographical error (the previous data 87.0 ± 3.4 has been replaced with 84.0 ± 3.4 Kg)

Reviewer 2 Report

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for this study of great importance for the performance of athletes in relation to COVID-19.

The introduction is in line with the objectives of the article and presents good relevance as well as a structure that meets the journal's quality standards.

In reference to the experimental design section, the authors describe the process correctly and clearly, and the figure presented facilitates the understanding of what is presented in this section. The same applies to the section on participants as well as the training programme. Once again, the figures presented make it easier to read and understand the contents presented, and the training protocols followed by the authors in their intervention are very clear.

In the section on anthropometric assessment, although the authors cite these assessments, it is recommended that a brief summary be made of the main results of interest for the research I am reviewing.

Likewise, blood analysis, sports performance and statistical analysis are presented in a clear manner and in accordance with the objectives of the study presented.

The results presented are in accordance with the objectives of the research, without deviating from the important elements of the research and are presented in a clear, orderly manner and supported by figures that facilitate understanding. No errors are apparent.

The discussion and conclusions, although pertinent, the use of more current bibliographical references is recommended, as the percentage of citations from the last 5 years, I believe, should be higher.

It is recommended to include more current references in the document. Almost 50% of the referenced documents, specifically 46.75%, are older than the last 5 years.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I would like to thank you for refereeing our manuscript.

We have made appropriate amendments to the manuscript following your suggestions.

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for this study of great importance for the performance of athletes in relation to COVID-19.

The introduction is in line with the objectives of the article and presents good relevance as well as a structure that meets the journal's quality standards.

In reference to the experimental design section, the authors describe the process correctly and clearly, and the figure presented facilitates the understanding of what is presented in this section. The same applies to the section on participants as well as the training programme. Once again, the figures presented make it easier to read and understand the contents presented, and the training protocols followed by the authors in their intervention are very clear.

In the section on anthropometric assessment, although the authors cite these assessments, it is recommended that a brief summary be made of the main results of interest for the research I am reviewing.

We thank the Referee for the important suggestion; we have now added a short summary at the end of section 2.1.

Likewise, blood analysis, sports performance and statistical analysis are presented in a clear manner and in accordance with the objectives of the study presented.

The results presented are in accordance with the objectives of the research, without deviating from the important elements of the research, and are presented in a clear, orderly manner and supported by figures that facilitate understanding. No errors are apparent.

The discussion and conclusions, although pertinent, the use of more current bibliographical references is recommended, as the percentage of citations from the last 5 years, I believe, should be higher.

It is recommended to include more current references in the document. Almost 50% of the referenced documents, specifically 46.75%, are older than the last 5 years.

We have revised the discussion using more current bibliographical references.