Exploring the Association between Air Pollution and Active School Transportation: Perceptions of Children and Youth in India

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The reviewed manuscript presents an interesting and not enough investigated topic, how the perceptions of youth on air pollution affects active school transportation. As the authors state, no previous research exists in India on this topic.

 

The main strengths of the article are the innovative topic, the sampling method used, and the large sample of youth engaged in the study. The paper is well written, but I formulate the following remarks to improve the overall quality of the work:

 

Main comments:

 

1. The abstract should be improved by mentioning the results of the study.

 

2. I suggest that the objective/scope/aim of the study to be clearly stated in the paper.

 

3. Formulate hypothesis for your study or research questions

 

4. Add information to the limitations, another limitation is measuring air pollution perception by a single question.

 

5. Also add the implications of the study

 

Minor comments:

 

1.    Review if the bibliography follows the mdpi format

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study aimed to examine the association between perceptions of an air pollution problem and AST among children and youth in India. I think this paper is an interesting topic. But it needs a major revision before accepted. The following changes are recommended to help improve things:

1. The introduction should make clear the main purpose of the essay. For example, the study could make it more clear that its purpose was to examine the relationship between Indian children's and adolescents' perceptions of air pollution issues and AST.

2. Logistic regression model is insufficient to explain. This article mentions a logistic regression model, but does not provide enough detail to explain how this model is used to analyze the data, or why this model was chosen. This can be confusing for readers unfamiliar with statistical methods.

3. Data collection methods are not detailed. The article mentions a cross-sectional observational study, but does not detail how the study samples were selected, the distribution of the samples, what the data collection tools were, and so on.

4. The missing picture. No chart is provided to support this argument. Some graphics can be added to the table to provide a more intuitive understanding and visual effect.

5. Analysis of the determinants of AST is lacking. Although this paper explores the relationship between air pollution and AST, it does not analyze other factors that may affect AST, such as family economic status, parental education level, and community facilities. These factors may have an impact on AST and should therefore be considered in the analysis.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The expression is quite fluent.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I do not have any further comments to make. The manuscript was revised according to the formulated comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have made a comprehensive revision according to the review comments. I have no further comments, I suggest receiving it.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The expression is quite fluent.