Breaking the Silence: Perceived Barriers to Safeguarding Child and Young Athletes in Uganda and a Rights-Based Framework for Positive Change
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is well written and easy to follow. The information given is valid about the need for the study. I believe the authors truly believe in what they are arguing, however, the study has major flaws.
1. The introduction was good.
2. Material and Methods were clear, however, the sample size was very low with 11 participants. Only 4 athletes, who were adults. The other seven participants were coaches, administrators, and health care workers. The measurement instrument is not shared in the study, only results of 5 questions that seek information about some sort of intervention, of which we are never given information as to what the intervention might be. This must be addressed.
3. The results section discusses issues that we have no way of knowing how, to what degree, or what questions were asked for the 11 participants. Instead we are given random responses from the participants that match no criteria, other than the CIFR domains are discussed, but we never see the instrument.
4. At this point the authors discuss global issues of culture and norms, political processes, funding, and resources and the authors attempt to make an argument that these 11 individuals from four distinct population groups can argue the case.
4. The discussion is an assumed reality of what exists in sport and the problems of safe guards or lack of safe guards that exist. I have no doubts that athletes are abused, just as I have no doubts that many are not abused. I have no doubts that safe guards need to be in place. I have no doubts that most systems fail in protecting all athletes. I also have no doubts that in general most athletes have a good experience; but I also have no doubts that failings occur. However, the authors of this article neither have the data nor the amount of participant response to support their position.
I recommend the authors be clear about what they asked of their participants. I recommend that they write clearly and purposefully that their data appears to support their position and much of the literature, that safe guards fail.
Author Response
Please find author response point by point to reviewer 1's report in an attached file
We have highlighted those changes in yellow in the revised manuscript. We hope these additions fulfil the criteria for full acceptance of our paper.
Many thanks again for your time and consideration.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I found the article proposed by the authors very interesting indeed. I think the paper promotes interesting knowledge, offering a perspective on the situation in a country that has been little investigated with respect to violence in sports contexts. The paper is well structured. The introduction is concise, and I would like the authors to provide more data on the prevalence of forms of abuse in children, adolescents and young adults in their cultural context (or similar contexts). I would welcome comment on the development of research on abuse and maltreatment in general in Uganda. Also, I would like to know more about data on how much and which sports are attended by Ugandans and what possibilities there are for all families to have their children attend sports.
The paper presents a good analysis strategy, although I would like a more thorough argumentation on the limitations of the research. The description of the practical implications is very good.
Author Response
Please find author response point by point to reviewer 1's report in an attached file
We have highlighted those changes in red in the revised manuscript. We hope these additions fulfil the criteria for full acceptance of our paper.
Many thanks again for your time and consideration.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is well written, well referenced, well designed, and will do good and little harm.
My comment about little harm relates to the findings. I do not believe the findings support what is discussed and argued. HOWEVER, what the authors are presenting is a good faith perspective of what the research may mean and how that research can benefit athletes. My problem with the sample population is that how can one code the response of athletes, coaches, and administrators and place them on the same level to inform or address the questions offered? I believe there is a large flaw in the interpretation of the data... HOWEVER, I would also argue that the data is logical and follows from the descriptor of the country, population, cultural practices, and ethical concerns. Researcher bias is a problem with this paper, however, the bias is not destroying the validity of what is being argued. The issues discussed here are universal and the authors paradigm to address it is beneficial. Therefore, even with my concerns, I will vote to accept for publication.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Many thanks again for your diligent review that identifies a balanced account of possible flaws and strengths of our work. We appreciate that you support the publication of our paper and that you have seen the benefits in including this study on the Special Issue.
Best wishes,
