The ‘DEEP’ Landing Error Scoring System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The present study shows a very interesting analysis of the error scoring system. The paper is well-written and original so that deserve publication after minor revision.
Comment:
Page 3 line 88: add a final sentence on the main finding and conclusion of your work after describing the aims
Page 9 line 224: Add a sentence to describe how your findings can be useful for the readers.
page 10 line 324: add a sentence on future work
Author Response
Please find attached Word document.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
what a great way to start the review year 2020. Not only is the manuscript well written, no the content is of very high impact to the clinical community. Screening and tracking ACL related landing problems is a big problem in daily clinical practice. While the content and technical aspect of the manuscript is very well done, I would have loved to see higher quality presentation with regards to the figures. Figure 2 is not very intuitive and would benefit from additional legends and may be a zoom in for the regions of interest. Also please explain your figures in the legend more extensively. Also in Table 3 be so kind to add a column quickly writing down the corresponding joint or angle as jumping back and forth is not very convenient. Figure 4 is very interesting once I understood it, maybe it is easier if you emphasize the fact that >5 is a 10.7 times higher risk, just to remind the reader why you chose the fours quadrants. Please make sure they have the same axes, otherwise it is hard to grasp the real differences. Would a Bland-Altmann not provide additional information? Currently it seems and that needs to be discussed why the actual LESS score is 9 and the predicted around 4.8. How are you dealing with 5 point error difference? Also changing from integers to decimals what does that add, higher granularity? In general it would be very nice to read how this new technology could find its way into practice, this part needs to emphasized. The video is a way in the right direction but the message could be emphasized to drive home the importance of this approach. For the clinical community it would be very interesting to a clinical example of either a simulated "bad knee" towards a good landing after "recovery" just to emphasize again the idea and convenience behind the automatic scoring tool (could be a video).
All in all a very well structured manuscript and I think by improving the visual component and emphasizing on the importance of this approach will make this a very nice and well received manuscript.
Kind regards,
Clint Hansen
Author Response
Please find attached a Word document.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
