Analysis of Yoga as an Inclusive Sport in Educational Contexts
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The writeup is problematic. It does not primarily fulfill the requirements of a research article. The methods section is short and incomplete. It fails to give the required details of the methods used and their explanation. The literature review is not up to the mark. The way this study has been conducted and presented in this article is not scientific. The necessary details are missing. For example, the questionnaire instrument has not been provided to reviewers for its evaluation, the details about how that instrument was developed, and which literature was reviewed (and how), during which semester this study was conducted, etc., are missing. The demographic details of the participants are missing. Reference# 14 has been misused. That reference is of a Delphi study, whereas the authors did not conduct a Delphi study. It is not described whether the instrument validity was checked or not? So many tests have been performed, but the way they have been explained is problematic. A moderate level of English editing is required. The essential details about which drills of the yoga and how much time to be spared by the students to do yoga, of what age levels yoga is required for students, are missing.
Author Response
The article has been thoroughly revised, both in English and in the writing, so that it is easier for both the evaluator and the reader to read it. Errors in references have been corrected. Also, all the sections of the "methods" section have been extended and clarified. Details have been added to the article so that it has a research structure (evaluation questionnaire, how it was developed, etc). The semester in which the research was carried out and the demographic factors of the sample population have also been specified. It details how the validity of the instrument has been carried out. As for the yoga exercises and their duration, they have not been included in the article, since they are not relevant, but rather what is sought is a relationship between the variables, a question that has raised doubts, and so it has been clarified with the introduction of some explanatory paragraphs.
In the new version, all the changes made are attached, being reflected with the change control.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The subject of the study is very interesting and important for today's society.
The introduction is well structured but lacks in terms of the review carried out, it would be very interesting if the authors indicated the rate of physical activity in university students, since there are quite a few studies carried out in the study area, most of the references are from Spanish authors, therefore, it is suggested that a more exhaustive search be carried out in databases such as web of science and non-Spanish references.
The methodology is very regular, the article is lacking in terms of information, where does the sample by province come from? What specialty do the university students come from? Because if they are physical education, the approach is different.
The level of experts for validation is not explained, this should be made more comprehensive.
The results are very complete, but they are very redundant, and they are not well understood, it provides too much data when it should be more simplified.
The discussion must be completed and the conclusions will be more concise
When the modifications are made it will be a very good article
Author Response
The physical activity rate of both primary school and university students has been included to compare statistics. Bibliographic references from the Web Science database have been included. The methodology has been extended in order to make it clearer. The demographic data of the sample population has been clarified. The results of the research have been simplified and the conclusions have been extended.
In the new version, all the changes made are attached, being reflected with the change control.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The conclusions are very valuable regarding the five dimensions,however there is some confusion between the inclusive and sport
dimensions.
Author Response
The results of the research have been simplified and the conclusions have been expanded to make them easier to read for both the evaluator and the reader, avoiding redundant data.
In the new version, all the changes made are attached, being reflected with the change control.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I'm satisfied with the changes made by the authors in this revised article.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article can be published
