Morphology and Maturity Status and Their Relationship with Stroke Steadiness in Young Sprint Paddlers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General Comment：

The authors were required to undertake a comprehensive review of the coherence and logical structure of the entire text prior to its publication. This was deemed imperative.

Specific comments are shown below:

1.Introduction:

Major：

[Comment 1] In the introduction section of this study, it is imperative for the authors to delve deeper into elucidating the research's intrinsic value and its innovative contributions.

[Comment 2] The introduction section lacks a systematic exposition of the test metrics employed in this study, with the presentation displaying a rather subjective tone.

[Comment 3] In the introduction section, it is expected of the authors to formulate the requisite research hypotheses.

 

Minor：

[Comment 1] Line47-48 “Performance at these ages is largely influenced by the level of maturity an athlete has already experienced.”

What is the author's intended meaning with this statement?

[Comment 2] Line55-56“Nevertheless, maximizing stroke length while maintaining stroke pace to enhance propulsion and minimize energy expenditure is particularly challenging during races” This statement appears to lack a coherent logical connection with the preceding context.

[Comment 3] Line 59-60: “Athletes with a higher stroke index exhibit higher speeds while expending less energy, leading to superior overall performance.” The author repetitively illustrates this concept throughout the text.

[Comment 4] Line66-67: “However, there is limited understanding of how stroke steadiness is influenced by other variables thar are related to performance in this sport.” Please verify the words for any associated errors.

 

2. Materials and Methods

Minor：

[Comment 1] Please ensure uniformity in the number of decimal places in Table 1.

[Comment 2] Line106-110: How is the control of errors in trajectory recording achieved? How can the authors mitigate the impact of data noise during the data processing stage? Could the authors explore the possibility of utilizing a camera equipped with an image stabilization feature to address this issue?

[Comment 3] In the statistical analysis section, the author should specify the variables that were examined as the primary focus of the intended study. Additionally, it is important to clarify whether these variables were in discrete or continuous format.

 

3. Results

Minor：

[Comment 1] Why did the authors omit the presentation of the calculated results derived from the experimental data? Instead, only the statistical outcomes was provided.

[Comment 2] The reviewers have requested the authors to vividly illustrate the pertinent results through the use of diagrams, which would enhance the presentation.

 

4. Discussion

Major：

Overall, the authors have not sufficiently expanded upon a robust discussion of the study's findings. Within this section, the authors should have focused on elaborating upon the underlying reasons for the results, providing recommendations for subsequent technical analysis of the athletes, and other relevant aspects.

 

Minor：

[Comment 1] Line225-227: “The main 225 finding of this study was the strong interrelationship identified among stroke steadiness and paddler’s experience, maturity status and chronological age, especially in LTS.” How did the authors quantify the variable of "experience" and utilize it to draw pertinent conclusions? BTW, this paper could be added in the discussion

Population-level Interventions Based on Walking and Cycling as a Means to Increase Physical Activity. Physical Activity and Health, 5(1), p.55–63.DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/paah.87

[Comment 2] Line233-235: “The significant stroke correlations between experience and stroke steadiness identified in the present research might suggest that early specialization is paramount to achieve 234 an efficient technique that might result in optimal kinematics and performance in sprint 235 canoeing.” What is the underlying basis for the author's aforementioned conclusion? It appears that the latter is not thoroughly explicated.

[Comment 3] Line236-239: “Previous studies in young paddlers have highlighted the importance of technical ability in canoeing, identifying maturity differences in comparison with kayakers [30,31]. Traditionally, all young paddlers began the familiarization and acquisition of fundamental paddling skills in kayak.” The reviewer found it difficult to discern the intended message conveyed by these two sentences written by the author.

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

First of all, thank you for the time taken to review the paper and the useful suggestion and comments.

All the responses are in blue and the modified text in red

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic is of interest to several groups of readers: medicine, sports, nutritionists and manufacturers who produce canoes (because an ergonomic shape of the canoe can contribute to the performance of the participant). It is important to know and understand what the limits are for the body, which values indicate high risks and how to avoid dangerous situations.

The research methodology is presented according to the paper declared objective: to analyse the relationship between anthropometric and maturity variables with stroke stability, both in the short and long term, to see if these variables can influence performance by improving stroke stability.

I recommend you talk to a sports medicine doctor because the article is about the correlation between stroke stability and competitive success in young paddlers... I think it is important what the doctor recommends in terms of physical effort and where the risk limits are, depending on the age and health condition of the competitor (this condition is strictly determined by genetic inheritance, geographical region, lifestyle and diet).

The topic is interesting and offers valuable results regarding the relationship between anthropometric and maturity variables with stroke steadiness in both the short and long term, to see if these variables can influence performance by improving stroke steadiness.

I recommend giving more details on the following aspects:

1. what recommendations or advice do doctors give regarding stroke? How is this problem mentioned in the medical field and how is it related to physical exertion?

2. in physical activities, the body measurements change according to the complexity and duration. The authors said: ... "Stretched stature (cm) and direct lengths (cm) were measured using a GPM anthropometer (Siber-Hegner, Switzerland), body mass (kg) was determined using a SECA 862 digital scale (SECA, Germany) and girths (cm) were measured by non-extensible metallic tape (Lufkin W606PM, USA)." How did they measure stretched stature? In all the literature and research related to anthropometry, body lengths are measured with the tape measure, not with the GPM anthropometer.

3. How did they determine the values of the various anthropometric measures during physical exertion? Are these values meaningful and reliable from a statistical point of view to use in research and draw various conclusions? What are the specific standards for this sport? How do these values compare to the norms? For each sport there is a standard that you should mention in the reference list and use for a research.

4. Which are the limits of this study? Did the authors consider to continue it?

Author Response

First of all, thank you for the time taken to review the paper and the useful suggestion and comments.

The responses are in blue and the modified text in red

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have well addressed my question, now I recommend to accept. 

Minor editing of English language required