Acceleration Capacity and Vertical Jump Performance Relationship in Prepubertal Children

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Interesting research papaer with some weak points. for example:

All participants were recruited from the same handball club. That's a weak point of the reserach and the authors should state it clearly at the conclusion section. Furthermore, the results based on handball players only, so we don't know what happens in other teams sports, therefore the main title of the article is somehow tricky... Perhaps the authors should consider change it accordingly.

As the participants were not adult a written consent for their participation in the research from their parents is mandatory amd authors should add it in the patrticipants section (I really hope they have it in ahead!)

In the statistics section the authors stated that they use Bonferroni adjustment, which is more valuable and sensitive in sportpschyology research papers and not for example Sheffe. I would like to see clearly in the results section the bonferroni results, (or scheffe if the authors choose to change it).

In the conclusion section please add weak and strong points of the research and what future research should further investigate.

Author Response

Response to reviewer: The authors thank the reviewer for the very interesting and helpful comments. Please see below a point-by-point response to all of your comments. Alterations in the manuscript are presented in red font.

All participants were recruited from the same handball club. That's a weak point of the reserach and the authors should state it clearly at the conclusion section. Furthermore, the results based on handball players only, so we don't know what happens in other teams sports, therefore the main title of the article is somehow tricky... Perhaps the authors should consider change it accordingly.

Response to reviewer: The recruitment was within the same handball training group. However, the main aim of this study was to explore physical tests in prepubertal children which corresponded to the sample included. Because most of the participants included in this study were only beginners in the activity (less than 2 years handball experience) and practicing other activities in the week, they are not considered specialized in this specific activity. For this reason, the original title was conserved, but the need to conduct similar studies to confirm these observations with other prepubertal populations was added in the conclusion section. Moreover, this possible weak point, has been added in the conclusion section as suggested.

As the participants were not adult a written consent for their participation in the research from their parents is mandatory amd authors should add it in the patrticipants section (I really hope they have it in ahead!)

Response to reviewer: The fact that written consent was obtained from the participant’s parents was added in Methods.

In the statistics section the authors stated that they use Bonferroni adjustment, which is more valuable and sensitive in sportpschyology research papers and not for example Sheffe. I would like to see clearly in the results section the bonferroni results, (or scheffe if the authors choose to change it)

Response to reviewer: As explained in line 122, post-hoc tests with Bonferroni adjustments were conducted if a significant main effect was observed in an ANOVA. The ANOVA test was used only in the comparison between sex for the performance of the various jumps. The other variables were tested with the Student’s t-test. To facilitate the reading, the results of the post-hoc test were clarified in Results (line 148).

Moreover, the reviewer suggested to use Scheffe post-hoc tests. According to this comment, Shceffe were conducted and gave similar results. For this reason, post-hoc tests with Bonferroni adjustment were conserved.

In the conclusion section please add weak and strong points of the research and what future research should further investigate.

Response to reviewer: The recruitment in the same handball club was mentioned as a limitation. The perspective to conduct similar studies in more diversified prepubertal populations was also added in the Conclusion section.

Reviewer 2 Report

The format of the manuscript must be improved firstly because when more than one reference is cited in the same site they are not done following ACS criteria. Further on, the space between lines is not adequate to MDPI standards and also, tables are not well placed the first table that we can see has no margin. Moreover, the supplementary table it's placed right after the conclusions when it should be placed after the references.

Further on, regarding content, in the introduction when the authors describe some of the findings of  previous literature they do not mention whether it was in boys on girls which is important as development differences between both genders and they very well showed. Further on, there is no mention on the physiological changes on child development which It's important to later showcase the importance of the research on this topic. 

Author Response

Response to reviewer: The authors thank the reviewer for the very interesting and helpful comments. Please see below a point-by-point response to all of your comments. Alterations in the manuscript are presented in red font.

The format of the manuscript must be improved firstly because when more than one reference is cited in the same site they are not done following ACS criteria. Further on, the space between lines is not adequate to MDPI standards and also, tables are not well placed the first table that we can see has no margin. Moreover, the supplementary table it's placed right after the conclusions when it should be placed after the references

Response to reviewer: The format of the manuscript was modified following the reviewer’s observations.

Further on, regarding content, in the introduction when the authors describe some of the findings of  previous literature they do not mention whether it was in boys on girls which is important as development differences between both genders and they very well showed

Response to reviewer: As suggested, modifications were made to indicate when studies included boys or girls. The nomination of “prepubertal children” was used when the cited study included both sexes.

Further on, there is no mention on the physiological changes on child development which It's important to later showcase the importance of the research on this topic. 

Response to reviewer: The authors are not sure to understand the reviewer’s comment. However, the authors made alterations in the introduction to better clarify neuromuscular changes that can occur during growth.

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of the paper is interesting and fits the scope of the journal. The text is relatively well written and composed. I have only minor comments that I believe that help to improve the paper.

Introduction

Line 39. Could you please clarify which ages classify as prepubertal for children?

Methods

Line 74. If the participants are handball players, you can include this information in the abstract.

Conclusion

I think it will be useful to report the importance of this study.

Author Response

Response to reviewer: The authors thank the reviewer for the very interesting and helpful comments. Please see below a point-by-point response to all of your comments. Alterations in the manuscript are presented in red font.

Introduction

Line 39. Could you please clarify which ages classify as prepubertal for children?

Response to reviewer: A significant interindividual difference in the timing and the rate of biological maturation can be observed. For instance, it is possible to observe more than three years of difference between the start of the pubertal development between a child with early development and a child with late development (Lloyd et al., 2014). This interindividual difference increases if the sample includes girls and boys. For this reason, the authors preferred to conserve the nomination “prepubertal children” to refer to a similar maturation and not to an unclear chronological age.

Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Faigenbaum AD, Myer GD, De Ste Croix MB. Chronological age vs. biological maturation: implications for exercise programming in youth. J Strength Cond Res. 2014 May;28(5):1454-64. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000391

Methods

Line 74. If the participants are handball players, you can include this information in the abstract

Response to reviewer: Because most of the participants included in this study were only beginners in the activity (less than 2 years of handball experience) and practicing other activities in the week, they are not considered specialized in the activity. But authors agree with the reviewer and consider this aspect of the study as a limitation. For that reason, it has been added to the conclusion.

Conclusion

I think it will be useful to report the importance of this study.

Response to reviewer: The conclusion section was completed as suggested by the reviewer.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors it still remains unclaer why you are usingBonferroni post-hoc tests and not Sheffe post hoc analysis...

Author Response

Dear Reviewer.

As indicated in our previous answer, Scheffe and Bonferroni post-hoc tests gave the same conclusion and almost similar p-values. Scheffe was therefore conducted and was indicated in Statistics section (L126). Four p-values were corrected (table2, L146, L149 and L150). No other modification was made. The authors hope the reviewer will be happy with these alterations.