A Comparative Analysis Study on Para Athletics’ Track Discipline Change and Performance Trend in the Paralympic Games (2004–2020)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The subject of this study is important, but its presentation must be improved. Please, find in the attached file my considerations to improve this study.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

A Comparative Analysis Study on Para Athletics’ Track Discipline Change and Performance Trend in the Paralympic Games (2004-2020)

Response to reviewer 1’s comments

Thank the reviewer for pointing out the very important issue. The reviewer’s point is absolutely correct. So, following the reviewer's feedback, I have revised it in this study.

1. Change to...the results.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Changed (Line 22).

2. Rewrite and add a clear conclusion of the study.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Rewrite (Line 33-37).

3. add references at the end of this paragraph..

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added references (Line 57)

4. add references at the end of this sentences. Define all the abbreviations in the first time, here, and throughout the manuscript.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added references and plus defined the abbreviation. (Line 70)
  
  

5. add references at the end of this sentences.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added references (Line 85)

6. add references at the end of this sentences.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added references (Line 92)

7. rewrite considering the two studies, 3,4.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you suggested it, rewrote the sentence. (Lines 94-95).

8. rewrite considering the 2 studies, 7,8.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you suggested it, rewrote the sentence. (Lines 96-99).

9. rewrite considering the 3 studies, 9, 10, 11.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you suggested it, rewrote the sentence. (Lines 100).

10. if possible, add a reference/site of the IPC

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added references. (Lines 145).

11. delete the dot.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. deleted. (Line 171, 183)

12. put all the "p" related to statistical analysis in italic format, here, and throughout the manuscript.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. All statistical analyses have been replaced with italics(Line 196 - 329).
  
  

13. Move to the Conclusion.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. This paragraph have been moved to the conclusion according to reviewer's suggestion. (Line 545-551)
  
  

14. a paragraph before the Conclusion with the strenght of this study.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you mentioned it, I have been rewrited a paragraph before the conclusion with the strength of this study according to reviewer suggestion. (Line 475-481)
  
  

15. - add a paragraph before the Conclusion with the limitations of this study.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you mentioned it, I have been rewrited a paragraph before the conclusion with the limitations of this study according to reviewer suggestion.(Line 482-488)

16. The conclusion is too long and it must be shortened.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. According to your suggestion, I have reduced it to the extent that there is no shortage of content to be conclude (Line 492-544)
  
  

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

First I want to greet all of the authors and congratulate them on this initiative on para-athletics.

My first question is related to the article as a whole. How did you improve the performance of these athletes by gathering the data from a longitudinal observation of different results?  

Where can we observe the difference between the track discipline change and performance trends?

Is there any statistical analysis done on this study from which we can clearly observe the influence on performance?

Author Response

A Comparative Analysis Study on Para Athletics’ Track Discipline Change and Performance Trend in the Paralympic Games (2004-2020)

Response to reviewer 2’s comments

Thank the reviewer for pointing out the very important issue. The reviewer’s point is absolutely correct. So, following the reviewer's feedback, I have revised it in this study.

1. My first question is related to the article as a whole. How did you improve the performance of these athletes by gathering the data from a longitudinal observation of different results?  

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. In the results of this study, by analyzing the data of the track events of the Paralympic Games held five times, it was possible to confirm the overall event change and the level of the competition record. This can be used to establish strategies for participation in countries and teams that foster track athletes. Specifically, it is believed that the team can contribute to the improvement of performance by setting a reference record to achieve excellent performance and setting the direction and goal of training. In addition, the results of analyzing the trends of detailed events can be used to establish a strategy for participating athletes for each event in response to changes in the number of Paralympic track events.

2. Where can we observe the difference between the track discipline change and performance trends?

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Answers to the reviewer's questions are as follows. First, in this study, the contents summarizing the changes in the detailed events of the track discipline are presented in (Line 151-171) in the concluding paragraph. Second, the trend of performance is presented in (Line 209-238 ) in the concluding paragraph.

3. Is there any statistical analysis done on this study from which we can clearly observe the influence on performance?

• Appreciate the reviewer's good opinion, in this study, through the statistical analysis method applied in this study, we tried to search for changes in records by competition based on data. This was carried out to provide information from a statistical perspective on the parts that could not clearly explain the record change of track events. This study is a study that explains the longitudinal change in the record of track events for the disabled as data, and it is judged that it can be used as meaningful information in the field of sports for the disabled. In the future, it is judged that various information related to the performance of track and field events for the disabled can be generated by applying various methodologies and statistical analysis.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The aim of the study were to provide baseline data for disabled athletes’ (para athletes’) athletic performance  improvement in track by generating information on athletic performance trends through the identification of  para athletics’ discipline change in each Paralympic Games(PG) held between 2004 and 2020 and by analyzing differences of records by discipline level (podium group [winners’ group] and final group [group reaching finals]). To achieve its purpose, this study analyzed disabled athletes’ track events at five Paralympic Games (2004 Athens PG to 2020 Tokyo PG) organized by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) and checked changes in disciplines.

The research is innovative and it was carried out methodologically correctly.

The work is written following the steps of the scientific method.

The conclusions from the study may be more interesting. 

The study is well designed. However I have some minor comments I’d like to express.

The Abstract must be improved, with a sequence of the following systematization: Objectives, Methods, Results, and Conclusions.

In the abstract, add an introduction before the purpose of the work.

Introduction: Please, insert new references relevant to the research (2022 year).

Discussion: The discussion will always connect to the introduction  you posed and the literature you reviewed. Given the above:  More relevant references are needed. I suggest you get support from some up-to-date sources. In addition, I think that the discussion will contribute more to the field with the findings. So, please insert new references (2022) relevant to the research.

Conclusion: The conclusion of a research paper is where you wrap up your ideas and leave the reader with a strong final impression. It is worth formulating more boldly conclusions divided into cognitive (despite limitations) and application.

In my opinion, the conclusions should be more specific not generalized, but this is only a suggestion.

Author Response

A Comparative Analysis Study on Para Athletics’ Track Discipline Change and Performance Trend in the Paralympic Games (2004-2020)

Response to reviewer 3’s comments

Thank the reviewer for pointing out the very important issue. The reviewer’s point is absolutely correct. So, following the reviewer's feedback, I have revised it in this study.

1. The Abstract must be improved, with a sequence of the following systematization: Objectives, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. In the abstract, add an introduction before the purpose of the work.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you suggestion about this, I added an introduction to abstract before the purpose of the work. (Line 10-12)
  And Methods and Conclusion are added and revised. (Line 16, 36-39)
  
  

2. Introduction: Please, insert new references relevant to the research (2022 year).

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added new research (Line 86)
  
  

3. The discussion will always connect to the introduction you posed and the literature you reviewed. Given the above: More relevant references are needed. I suggest you get support from some up-to-date sources. In addition, I think that the discussion will contribute more to the field with the findings. So, please insert new references (2022) relevant to the research

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. Added new references(Line 293)
  
  

4. The conclusion of a research paper is where you wrap up your ideas and leave the reader with a strong final impression. It is worth formulating more boldly conclusions divided into cognitive (despite limitations) and application.

• Thank you for the reviewer’s suggestion. As you suggestion about this, I revised the conclusions to draw conclusions with more clarity on the content.(Line 492-551)

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Congratulations. The manuscript was improved, and I am recommending its acceptance in its current form. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept the article in its present form