Changes in Eating Habits and Physical Activity after COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdowns in Italy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present manuscript presents an interesting topic. The paper is well structured. 

However, there are some points that need clarification.

Lines 57-62: please clarify the aims of the study.

Methods:

• Please describe how the survey was disseminated (e.g. media; social networks...) and how the potential participants were contacted.
• Please justify the exclusion criteria used.
• Line 70-71: It is not clear why the participants underwent the survey in 2018. Was this study not designed after the beginning of lockdown (in 2020)?
• Please provide more detail on the anthropometric data collection: who collected the data, how measurements were performed...

The conclusion must contain an objective response to the aims of the study.

Author Response

Dear editors and reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for the valuable impulses that have led us to profoundly change the paper. Hoping that we have satisfied your requests as much as possible, we ask you to re-evaluate our paper.

The Authors

REVIEWER N.1

Lines 57-62: please clarify the aims of the study.

We thank the reviewer for the valuable suggestion. We have rewritten the paragraph because the objectives of the paper were not very clear.

Please describe how the survey was disseminated (e.g. media; social networks...) and how the potential participants were contacted. Please justify the exclusion criteria used.

We have described in more detail the methods used to disseminate the questionnaire and justified the exclusion criteria.

Line 70-71: It is not clear why the participants underwent the survey in 2018. Was this study not designed after the beginning of lockdown (in 2020)?

The questionnaire was administered to all patients who attended a nutritionist's office prior to the first visit. Subsequently, after lockdown periods, we thought of asking the same patients to repeat the test to compare the results.

Please provide more detail on the anthropometric data collection: who collected the data, how measurements were performed…

We have revised and deepened the whole part related to nutritional assessment and body composition measurement.

The conclusion must contain an objective response to the aims of the study.

We have summarised the conclusions more precisely. We have provided target replies to the purposes of the study.

Reviewer 2 Report

Review manuscript ID: nutrients-1485069 titled "Changes in eating habits and physical activity after COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns: the Roman experience" by Lombardo et al.

This study evaluated the effect of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns on eating habits and physical activity. The authors compared pre- and post-lockdown data for 118 individuals. Main findings were significantly increased consumption of raw vegetables, whole grains and water. Also, higher prevalence of sleeping difficulties. 

The study is relevant and the manuscript is well written. I have no major criticism only some minor comments.  

The authors state that they have studied “118 obese individuals”. However, many individuals seem to a normal BMI according to data in table 1.

The authors state that an exclusion criteria was BMI > 40. In table 1 two individuals with a BMA >40 can be observed.

Only 118 out of 1256 individuals repeated the survey. The authors should perform some sort of analysis between those who participated and those who did not in order to evaluate if some sort of selection bias had occurred. You have a significant amount of baseline-data.

Author Response

Dear editors and reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for the valuable impulses that have led us to profoundly change the paper. Hoping that we have satisfied your requests as much as possible, we ask you to re-evaluate our paper.

The Authors

REVIEWER N.2

The authors state that they have studied “118 obese individuals”. However, many individuals seem to a normal BMI according to data in table 1.

We thank the Reviewer for the correct clarification. There was an error in the abstract which we have corrected.

The authors state that an exclusion criteria was BMI > 40. In table 1 two individuals with a BMI >40 can be observed.

We had misspelled the exclusion criteria. We have fixed it.

Only 118 out of 1256 individuals repeated the survey. The authors should perform some sort of analysis between those who participated and those who did not in order to evaluate if some sort of selection bias had occurred. You have a significant amount of baseline-data

Unfortunately, we do not have the anthropometric data of the original sample because they were not included in the previous study. We would have to take the data from the charts and for 2021 subjects it would be a very demanding job. We have sent a request to all 2021 subjects to repeat the survey. We did not make any kind of selection and it was a free choice of the individuals to participate.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed all the issues raised in the review report.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you very much for the additional comments and suggestions.

We have modified the manuscript according to the comments.

Regards

Author Response File: Author Response.doc