Pedagogical Models in Alternative Invasion Team Sports: A Systematic Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is very complete, but the research limitations section is not in English. It is better to express it in English.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1: The article is very complete, but the research limitations section is not in English. It is better to express it in English.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments and for your task as evaluator. The assessment carried out contributes to correcting the errors made and encourages the development of a work of higher scientific quality. You are right about the limitations section, there must have been an error in the layout process of the article, and we have not translated that section. This section will be modified to express it in English.

The limitations section (line 683) is redacted as follows:

“The results of the systematic review have contributed to configure an overview of the scientific knowledge on alternative invasive team sports from different perspectives, mainly from the research methodology and specific aspects of these sports in different areas educative, competitive and recreative. However, some limitations are recognized in this work, only research from the Web of Science and Scopus databases was included, written in three languages, Spanish, English and Portuguese. Therefore, we did not examine papers collected in other databases or published in other languages. In future research, it would be interesting to carry out a systematic review on this topic by expanding the searches to other databases. Despite having included many articles, insufficient evidence was found on pedagogical models and teaching styles in the implementation of these sports; therefore, it would be relevant to carry out a review on this topic for collective and individual sports, to provide a broader view”.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Simplify the results a bit, for a better understanding

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1: Simplify the results a bit, for a better understanding.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Your work as a reviewer is greatly appreciated; your contribution is favorable for the substantial improvement of the article and for it acquiring a higher scientific quality.

After reviewing the results section according to your recommendation, some sentences have been shortened and summarized, as well as some words that could be dispensable have been deleted. However, we consider that the results section cannot be shortened any further because all the data provided are fundamental and essential to present the most relevant and significant findings to achieve the proposed objective. If we were to summarize the results section further in a meaningful way, it would not be possible to report all the results found adequately.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

- It would be useful if all papers are summarized in a Table.

- Please add some practical implications for the findings of this review.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1:  It would be useful if all papers are summarized in a Table.

Response 1: His great contribution as reviewer of this manuscript is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much for your recommendations, comments, and proposals for improvement. The suggestions will be considered to introduce changes in the work with the aim of increasing the rigor and quality of the research.

The manuscript submitted includes a table with the most significant data (reference, objectives, sample, main results, etc.) of the articles reviewed that belong to the educative area, in which 39 documents are included, which can be found in Appendix A, specifically on page 16, line 767. However, this possibility was discarded because it was excessively large, since it would consist of 71 documents. Therefore, the most relevant area for our field of study was prioritized and the summary table was reduced to the educative context.

Point 2:  Please add some practical implications for the findings of this review.

Response 2: Once again, your comments and recommendations are greatly appreciated, as well as the great job done as an evaluation. This suggestion is greatly valued, since it is very beneficial to substantially improve the study presented. Some practical applications had been included in the discussion and conclusions in a general mode, but we have realized that they are not expressed in a clear way. Therefore, we will make a section specifically to express the practical implications found or obtained from this review.

This new section incorporated after the discussion part (line 668), is written as follows:

“Practical applications:

The implementation of alternative sports through a pedagogical model promotes the development of physical, psychological, social, tactical, technical, emotional, cognitive and coeducational aspects. These practices can be oriented to achieve one or several didactic objectives, therefore, it is recommended the use of a programming according to the objectives proposed, being necessary the adaptation of a pedagogical model. The Self-Construction of Materials Model is appropriate for promoting care for the environment and educating in the sustainability of the planet.

Alternative sports have great variability in terms of their possibilities. Their practice is susceptible to be oriented to different levels of competence and ages, as well as to different sports environments (educative, competitive and recreative), because of their capacity for flexibility and adaptation.  These sports modalities are a good tool for social inclusion, coeducation and gender equality, which promotes varied motor skills, participation, motivation, enjoyment, inclusion, adherence and sustainability”.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript presented is interesting, in which it analyzes the scientific production of alternative invasion team sports in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, following the PRISMA methodology. However, it presents a series of aspects that could be improved, which I list below:

INTRODUCTION: - Review throughout the entire manuscript that the references comply with the journal's standards. Especially also in references. - I recommend you include a small paragraph explaining the reason for doing this research at the end of the introduction.

DISCUSSION - I recommend adding the discussion in the following sections: o Main findings of this work o The implications of these results in the field of study of the research o Future lines of research

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1: The manuscript presented is interesting, in which it analyzes the scientific production of alternative invasion team sports in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, following the PRISMA methodology. However, it presents a series of aspects that could be improved, which I list below:

INTRODUCTION: - Review throughout the entire manuscript that the references comply with the journal's standards. Especially also in references.

Response 1:  First of all, we are very grateful for your work as a reviewer, as well as for your suggestions and appreciations.

The citation [69] collected on line 576 does not exist, it had been erroneously added. It has been corrected by reference 46.

The references included in the manuscript that do not adjust to the criteria established by the journal have been reviewed and corrected. The following are all the corrected references:

• Hernández-Vázquez, M. Juegos y deportes alternativos, 1rst ed.; Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Consejo Superior de Deportes: Madrid, Spain, 1997.
• Jiménez, J. Los juegos y deportes alternativos en educación física. Revista Digital Enfoques Educativos 2010, 67, 42-151.
• Parlebas, P. Contribution à un lexique commenté en science de l’action mortice, 2nd ed.; INSEP: Paris, France, 1981.
• Almond, L. Reflecting on themes: A games classification. In Rethinking games teaching; Thorpe, R., Bunker, D., Almond, L., Eds.; University of Technology: Loughborough, England, 1986; pp. 71–72.
• Calle, O.; Antúnez, A.; Ibáñez, S.J.; Feu, S. Conceptualización de los Juegos y Deportes Alternativos. In Pedagogia do Esporte: Ensino, Vivência e Aprendizagem do Esporte na Educação Física Escolar, 1rst ed.; Landivar, M.J., Ed.; UNEMAT: Cáceres Mato Groso, Brazil, Spain ,2020; pp.32-54. DOI: 10.29327/5194505.1-2
• Lara, A. J. (University of Girona, Girona, Cataluña, Spain); Cachón, J. (University of Girona, Girona, Cataluña, Spain). Kinball: los deportes alternativos en la formación del/la docente de educación física. Personal communication, 2010. https://dugi-doc.udg.edu/bitstream/handle/10256/3001/491.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• Arráez, J. M. Juegos y deportes alternativos con deficientes psíquicos. Apunts. Educación física y deportes 1995, 2, 69-80. https://raco.cat/index.php/ApuntsEFD/article/view/377427
• Feu, S. ¿Son los juegos deportivos alternativos una posibilidad para favorecer la coeducación en las clases de Educación Física?. Campo abierto: Revista de educación 2008, 27, 31-47.
• Requena, O. Juegos alternativos en educación física: flag football. Revista Digital Innovación y Experiencias Educativas 2008, 4, 1-10. http://docplayer.es/20871787-Juegos-alternativos-eneducacion-fisica-flagfootball.html
• Suero, S. F.; Morillo, A. H.; Montilla, V.G. Los deportes alternativos en el ámbito educativo. Revista de Educación, Motricidad e Investigación 2017, 6, 40-48. https://doi.org/10.33776/remo.v0i6.2800
• Martos-García, D.; Fernández-Lasa, U.; Usabiaga, O. Coeducación y deportes colectivos. La participación de las alumnas en entredicho. Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte 2020, 15, 411-419.
• Fernández-Río, J. Another Step in Models-based Practice: Hybridizing Cooperative Learning and Teaching for Personal and Social Responsibility. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 2014, 85, 3-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2014.937158
• González-Víllora, S.; Evangelio, C.; Sierra, J.; Fernández-Río, J. Hybridizing pedagogical models: A systematic review. European Physical Education Review 2019, 25, 1056-1074. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356336X18797363
• Fernández-Río, J.; Alcalá-Hortigüela, D.; Pérez-Pueyo, A. Revisando los modelos pedagógicos en educación física. Ideas clave para incorporarlos al aula. Revista Española de Educación Física y Deportes 2018, 423, 57-80. http://www.reefd.es/index.php/reefd/article/view/695
• Antúnez, A.; Ibáñez, S. J.; Feu, S. Analysis of the Research Methodology in Spanish Doctoral Theses on Handball. A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021, 18, 10579. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182010579
• Page, M. J.; McKenzie, J. E.; Bossuyt, P. M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T. C.; Mulrow, C. D.; ... Moher, D. Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología 2021, 74, 790-799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
• Casey, A; Goodyear, V.A. Can Cooperative Learning Achieve the Four Learning Outcomes of Physical Education? A Review of Literature. Quest 2015, 67, 56-72, DOI: 10.1080/00336297.2014.984733
• Gamonales, J. M.; Martín-Casañas, E.; Hernández-Beltrán, V.; Gámez-Calvo, L.; León, K.; Muñoz-Jiménez, J. Fútbol caminando para personas mayores: revisión sistemática. E-Balonmano.com 2021, 17, 195-210. http://ojs.e-balonmano.com/index.php/revista/article/view/547
• Mancha-Triguero, D.; García-Rubio, J.; Calleja-González, J.; Ibáñez, S. J. Physical fitness in basketball players: a systematic review. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2019, 59, 1513-1525. DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.19.09180-1
• Laudares-Silva, R.; Schwartz, G. M. Interfaces de gênero e empoderamento da mulher no Corfebol: uma revisão descritiva. cadernos pagu 2020, 58. https://doi.org/10.1590/18094449202000580009
• Caldevilla-Calderón, P.; Zapatero-Ayuso, J. A. Los deportes alternativos como contenidos para la Educación Física en Educación Secundaria (Alternative sports as content for Physical Education in Secondary Education). Retos 2022, 46, 1004–1014. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v46.94422
• Song, W.; Feng, L.; Wang, J.; Ma, F.; Chen, J.; Qu, S.; Luo, D. Play Smart, Be Smart? Effect of Cognitively Engaging Physical Activity Interventions on Executive Function among Children 4~12 Years Old: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Brain sciences 2022, 12, 762. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12060762
• Griggs, G. Why have alternative sports grown in popularity in the UK?. Annals of Leisure Research 2012, 15, 180-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/11745398.2012.659718
• Petrovic, A.; Koprivica, V.; Bokan, B. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed research in sport science: a methodological report. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation 2017, 39(2), 181-197.
• Barba-Martín, R. A.; Bores-García, D.; Hortigüela-Alcalá, D.; González-Calvo, G. The application of the teaching games for understanding in physical education. Systematic review of the last six years. International journal of environmental research and public health 2020, 17, 3330. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093330
• Amoroso, J. P.; Coakley, J.; Rebelo-Gonçalves, R.; Antunes, R.; Valente-dos-Santos, J.; Furtado, G. E. Teamwork, Spirit of the Game and Communication: A Review of Implications from Sociological Constructs for Research and Practice in Ultimate Frisbee Games. Social Sciences 2021, 10, 300. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10080300”

Point 2: INTRODUCTION: -I recommend you include a small paragraph explaining the reason for doing this research at the end of the introduction.

Response 2: Again, your opinions are appreciated as they are considered relevant to produce significant improvements in our study. Your recommendation is considered, therefore a paragraph (line 141) explaining the reason for this research in a clear way is introduced before the objective of the study.

"A conceptual and practical clarification of research analyzing Alternative Invasion Team Sport in the educative context is needed to enable professionals and investigators to locate the most relevant work in this area."

Point 3:  DISCUSSION - I recommend adding the discussion in the following sections: o Main findings of this work o The implications of these results in the field of study of the research o Future lines of research.

Response 3: We would like to thank you again for your assessments and opinions, which are so important for the perfection of this study.

In the discussion section we have chosen to present the practical implications following each of the findings found in the results instead of presenting them separately. However, the recommendations raised or provided are taken into consideration, therefore a new section is presented in which the main practical implications are grouped to facilitate their understanding.

This new section incorporated after the discussion part (line 668), is written as follows:

“Practical applications:

The implementation of alternative sports through a pedagogical model promotes the development of physical, psychological, social, tactical, technical, emotional, cognitive and coeducational aspects. These practices can be oriented to achieve one or several didactic objectives, therefore, it is recommended the use of a programming according to the objectives proposed, being necessary the adaptation of a pedagogical model. The Self-Construction of Materials Model is appropriate for promoting care for the environment and educating in the sustainability of the planet.

Alternative sports have great variability in terms of their possibilities. Their practice is susceptible to be oriented to different levels of competence and ages, as well as to different sports environments (educative, competitive and recreative), because of their capacity for flexibility and adaptation.  These sports modalities are a good tool for social inclusion, coeducation and gender equality, which promotes varied motor skills, participation, motivation, enjoyment, inclusion, adherence and sustainability”.

On the other hand, it is relevant and enriching for the research to establish the future lines of research, which are presented in another section following the practical implications.

This new section called future lines of research is included after the practical applications and limitations (line 695), that it is presented as follows:

“Future lines of research:

As a result of the weaknesses found among the results of this study, the limited number of alternative sports investigated by the scientific literature is evident, as well as the need for further research in different contexts.

In future research, it would be interesting to produce a systematic review on this topic by extending the search to other databases that provide more significant evidence of pedagogical models and teaching styles in the implementation of alternative invasion team sports.

It is advisable to address these limitations by conducting studies in the field of alternative sports practice, which analyse the effects on students according to pedagogical models in cognitive, emotional, psychological, physical and motor factors.

Likewise, the realization of works that examine the opinions and knowledge of Physical Education teachers according to their own classroom experiences on the different alternative sports, as well as the pedagogical models they use for their learning, would greatly contribute to increase the framework of knowledge on this subject of study from a pragmatic prism that qualitatively analyses the educational reality”.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

In general, the structure of the article is not very clear, and the literature citation is recommended to be used for nearly ten years.

Abstract: There is no specific description of the core focus of the article, and it is recommended to rewrite it.

Introduction: The content of the writing is not clear, please reorganize the content of the literature.

Materials and Methods: The title of the article does not correspond to the research method, and the revision of the title or the formulation of the research method should be re-examined.

Discussion: The discussion section does not specifically discuss the text.

References: There are only 54 literature citations, which is too small for literature review articles.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1: In general, the structure of the article is not very clear, and the literature citation is recommended to be used for nearly ten years.

Response 1: We appreciate your interest in reviewing the manuscript. Thank you very much for your suggestions and comments.

In the first place, the structure of a systematic review of the literature was followed using a classic format, for which the PRISMA methodology was used.

Likewise, the references older than ten years appear in the document, as they are necessary for the conceptualization of the object of study, so that it has been considered necessary to resort to these primary sources.

Point 2: Abstract: There is no specific description of the core focus of the article, and it is recommended to rewrite it.

Response 2: Once again, your comment is greatly appreciated.

The abstract has been revised, and it has been found that you were right, since it does not refer to the central focus of the study problem. Therefore, the abstract has been improved by including the problem statement of the article (line 12). As a result, the abstract has been rewritten to read as follows:

“Alternative sports are a growing sports practice that is being developed in the educative context, and its usefulness and validity is beginning to be disseminated through scientific publications. There are no studies that analyse these results as a whole. This research aimed to analyse the scientific production of alternative invasion team sports indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases. The guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) were followed. We studied variables grouped by contextual, procedural, and specific of alternative invasion team sports information. Seventy-one research studies published before 1 March 2023 were reviewed. A growth in the sci-entific literature was identified in the period 2004 to 2022. The predominant research approach was quantitative, where the most common designs were experiments and quasi-experiments. The most implemented sports were Floorball, Ultimate and Korfball. They were oriented to a greater extent to the development of psychological factors, physical-motor factors, and values. The most used ped-agogical models were the Game-Centred Model and the Sports Education Model. Progress is gen-erated by the practice itself and the use of these pedagogical models. The use of the hybridisation of the Self-Construction of Materials and Sports Education Model stands out, which favours respect for the environment, education in sustainability and prosocial behaviour. Sustainability becomes a fundamental objective in physical education classes. The scientific evidence of alternative invasion team sports is limited, therefore, the need to develop research on this topic of study is evident”.

Point 3: Introduction: The content of the writing is not clear, please reorganize the content of the literature.

Response 3: Once again, we are grateful for all the annotations and recommendations.

The content described in the introduction has been reread, we have considered that it was right in relation to the organization of the text, it has been proposed to change the order of some paragraphs to improve the sequencing and promote understanding.

The order of the first six paragraphs has been changed in order to improve the sequencing of the contents and achieve a more adequate understanding. For this reason, the order of the citations and references on which these contents were based has also had to be modified. The following sequence has been followed for the new order of the contents: 

1. Conceptualization of invasion sports.
2. Conceptualization of alternative sports, main characteristics, advantages of their practice.
3. The implementation of pedagogical models for learning invasion sports and alternative invasion sports.
4. Approximation to the works focused on systematic reviews.
5. Exposure of some systematic reviews focused on invasive alternative sports.
6. Statement of the problem that motivates this research.
7. Aims, goals and objectives pursued in this study.

Point 4: Materials and Methods: The title of the article does not correspond to the research method, and the revision of the title or the formulation of the research method should be re-examined.

Response 4: Once again we thank you for your suggestions, comments and recommendations.

We have considered your feedback on the proposed title. The title has been changed following your instructions, deleted and changed. The title is finally expressed as follows:

“Pedagogical Models in Alternative Invasion Team Sports. A systematic review”.

Point 5: References: There are only 54 literature citations, which is too small for literature review articles.

Response 5: Thank you very much for your contribution and your work in reviewing the manuscript.

The 54 references included in the article correspond to those used for the development of the text of the document. These references do not include the 71 articles submitted for review, which are presented in a table in the appendix of the document together with the main data and results of each of the academic papers, as presented in other similar systematic review papers. This form of presentation was decided so as not to exceed the number of references and not to be excessive, since the total would add up to 125 references.

If you considered necessary, the selected papers in the review could be included in the references, but as mentioned above, the number of references would total 125.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 6 Report

General Evaluation:

This manuscript provides a valuable contribution to the understanding of alternative invasion team sports. 

+The comprehensive review of scientific production on the topic offers a broad and in-depth analysis of the existing knowledge, highlighting trends and identifying research gaps. 

+The methodological rigor exhibited by the included articles enhances the credibility of the findings. Furthermore, the manuscript emphasizes the importance of integrating pedagogical models in sport interventions and recognizes the positive impacts of alternative sports on participants' holistic development. 

+The focus on promoting social inclusion, coeducation, and gender equality adds depth to the discussion. 

-While these strengths make the manuscript highly informative, there is room for improvement in addressing some weaknesses, such as the limited number of alternative sports investigated and the need for further research in different contexts. Addressing these limitations would enhance the overall value and impact of the manuscript, providing more comprehensive insights into the potential benefits and applications of alternative invasion team sports.

- The reference (69?) shown on line 581 should be corrected.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks for reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered all considerations in the document provided by you. Enclosed you will find our detailed answers to your inquiries:

Point 1: This manuscript provides a valuable contribution to the understanding of alternative invasion team sports.

+The comprehensive review of scientific production on the topic offers a broad and in-depth analysis of the existing knowledge, highlighting trends and identifying research gaps.

+The methodological rigor exhibited by the included articles enhances the credibility of the findings. Furthermore, the manuscript emphasizes the importance of integrating pedagogical models in sport interventions and recognizes the positive impacts of alternative sports on participants' holistic development.

+The focus on promoting social inclusion, coeducation, and gender equality adds depth to the discussion.

-While these strengths make the manuscript highly informative, there is room for improvement in addressing some weaknesses, such as the limited number of alternative sports investigated and the need for further research in different contexts. Addressing these limitations would enhance the overall value and impact of the manuscript, providing more comprehensive insights into the potential benefits and applications of alternative invasion team sports.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments and for your job as evaluator. The assessment carried out contributes to correcting the errors made and encourages the development of a work of higher scientific quality.

To confront these limitations, a section on limitations and future lines of research has been included, which aims to put forward proposals to respond to these weaknesses found in the study. These sections can be seen from line 683 to 710 of the manuscript.

“Limitations of the study:

The results of the systematic review have contributed to configure an overview of the scientific knowledge on alternative invasive team sports from different perspectives, mainly from the research methodology and specific aspects of these sports in different areas educative, competitive and recreative. However, some limitations are recognized in this work, only research from the Web of Science and Scopus databases was included, written in three languages, Spanish, English and Portuguese. Therefore, we did not examine papers collected in other databases or published in other languages. In future research, it would be interesting to carry out a systematic review on this topic by expanding the searches to other databases. Despite having included many articles, insufficient evidence was found on pedagogical models and teaching styles in the implementation of these sports; therefore, it would be relevant to carry out a review on this topic for collective and individual sports, to provide a broader view”.

“Future lines of research:

As a result of the weaknesses found among the results of this study, the limited number of alternative sports investigated by the scientific literature is evident, as well as the need for further research in different contexts.

In future research, it would be interesting to produce a systematic review on this topic by extending the search to other databases that provide more significant evidence of pedagogical models and teaching styles in the implementation of alternative invasion team sports.

It is advisable to address these limitations by conducting studies in the field of alternative sports practice, which analyse the effects on students according to pedagogical models in cognitive, emotional, psychological, physical and motor factors.

Likewise, the realization of works that examine the opinions and knowledge of Physical Education teachers according to their own classroom experiences on the different alternative sports, as well as the pedagogical models they use for their learning, would greatly contribute to increase the framework of knowledge on this subject of study from a pragmatic prism that qualitatively analyses the educational reality”.

Point 2: The reference (69?) shown on line 581 should be corrected

Response 2: Once again your work in reviewing the article is greatly appreciated, providing advice that contributes to improving and enriching the manuscript.

You are right in relation to the error you point out to us, reference 69 (line 581) does not exist, it had been erroneously added. It has been corrected by reference 46.

The authors hope that the corrections made are to your satisfaction and we can continue with the peer-review process of the manuscript. We remain at your disposal.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 5 Report

Based on the information provided, your research focuses on the scientific production of alternative invasion team sports, specifically analyzing studies indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases. You followed the guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Here are some comments on your research:

1. Research Objective and Methodology: The objective of your research to analyze the scientific production of alternative invasion team sports is clear and well-defined. The use of the PRISMA guidelines adds credibility to your study. It's commendable that you reviewed 71 research studies published before March 1, 2023, which indicates a thorough investigation.
2. Literature Growth and Research Approaches: Your identification of a growth in the scientific literature on alternative invasion team sports from 2004 to 2022 is significant. It suggests an increasing interest in this field. The predominance of quantitative research approaches, particularly experiments and quasi-experiments, demonstrates a strong emphasis on empirical investigation.
3. Studied Sports and Focus Areas: The inclusion of Floorball, Ultimate, and Korfball as the most implemented sports provides a specific context for your study. Your identification of the development of psychological factors, physical-motor factors, and values as the primary focus areas reflects the importance of holistic athlete development.
4. Pedagogical Models: The mention of the Game-Centred Model and the Sports Education Model as the most commonly used pedagogical models in the studied research is informative. It shows that these models have gained popularity in the context of alternative invasion team sports. The reference to the hybridization of the Self-Construction of Materials and Sports Education Model is interesting, as it promotes environmental respect, sustainability education, and prosocial behavior.
5. Importance of Sustainability: Highlighting the importance of sustainability as a fundamental objective in physical education classes related to alternative invasion team sports is relevant and timely. It demonstrates an awareness of the broader societal and environmental considerations associated with sports and physical education.
6. Limitations and Future Research: Acknowledging the limited scientific evidence on alternative invasion team sports indicates a gap in the literature. Your recognition of the need for further research in this area is valuable, as it highlights the potential for future studies to contribute to the field.

Overall, your research provides a comprehensive analysis of the scientific production, research approaches, focus areas, and pedagogical models in alternative invasion team sports. It raises important considerations regarding sustainability and identifies the need for further investigation. Well done!