Is the Endurance Standardized ACWR_HMLD or the Underlying Acute and Chronic Components Related to Injuries?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study evaluated the relevance of the high metabolic load distance (ACWRHMLD) to EP concerning non-contact injuries. This work has some research implications to aid in impairment assessment, and the following revisions are recommended to improve the quality of the manuscript.

1. Abstract: Please provide more detailed information on the conclusions.

2. Introduction: The introduction lacks a description of non-contact injuries, such as non-contact ACL injuries and ankle sprains. It is recommended to add relevant descriptions to improve the overall structure. For the description of non-contact injuries, the authors may consider referring to the following relevant studies: Accurately and effectively predict the ACL force: Utilizing biomechanical landing pattern before and after-fatigue (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2023.107761); Temporal kinematic and kinetics differences throughout different landing ways following volleyball spike shots (DOI: 10.1177/17543371211009485), to add a description of, for example, non-contact ACL injuries.

3. For subject sample size determination, please provide the sample calculation process to demonstrate statistical significance.

4. 2.3. Experimental design & injury documentation: Please add a more detailed description.

5. Lines 128: Suggested addition of subheading: 2.4.1

6. Lines 142: Suggested addition of subheading: 2.4.2

7. Tables 2 to 4: It is recommended that the results be presented in the form of a figure, which will present the results more visually and increase the reader's interest in reading and the readability of the paper.

8. The clarity of the ROC curves needs to be improved and it is recommended to increase the font of the axes as well as the recognizability of the curves.

9. The current study lacks a description of the limitations and has many limitations in terms of experimental design and reproducibility of methods.

10. Please streamline the conclusions section without repeating the results and provide more substantive recommendations.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.      Given the prestige of the journal, it is recommended that bibliographical sources 2, 3 and 22 be removed from the paper, as they are far too outdated to be referred to.

2.      Starting from the purpose of the paper, which states that the main goal of this analysis was to evaluate the relation of ACWRHMLD/EP (including acute and chronic component) to non-contact injuries, the recommendation is that after this sentence, it should be specified exactly what is the place of this research in the specialized scientific literature and what are the novel elements with which this study presents itself.

3.      It is recommended that the research hypothesis that a high EP level allows higher loads to be tolerated which favors a reduction of injury risk, be re-positioned within the Materials and Methods chapter.

4.      Please specify precisely which inclusion and exclusion criteria were used in the study.

5.      It is recommended that the exact sample size calculation and statistical power, or only one of the two, be specified in the study.

 

6.      Please kindly turn the paragraphs from lines 277 to 299 into component parts of the 5. Limitations of the study

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of the English language is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

After revisions, the paper's quality has somewhat improved. The following issues also need to be addressed. A detailed description of non-contact injuries is necessary; please refer to the reviewer's previous comments. In addition, it is necessary to add relevant information about the use of the presentation of ROC and AUC in the statistical analyses and to add relevant citations to fully illustrate them, the authors can refer to this related study (A new method proposed for realizing human gait pattern recognition: Inspirations for the application of sports and clinical gait analysis (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.10.019). It is recommended that the results be presented in the form of a figure, which will present the results more visually and increase the reader's interest in reading and the readability of the paper. Kindly refine the conclusions section by eliminating redundancy in the results and providing more substantial recommendations.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf