Longitudinal Variations of Body Characteristics in Italian Elite Adolescent Football Players: An Observational Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI really appreciate the opportunity to review this manuscript entitled “Longitudinal variations of body characteristics in Italian elite adolescent football players: a pilot study” This is important to explore this relationship in this population. I remark some issues (most of them in methods) in order to improve the quality of this manuscript.
Tittle should contain the study design, if you read “a pilot study” you first think about and experimental study which contains an intervention. It should be more appropriate to name this study “observational or longitudinal study”. Abstract is clear but should be improved, conclusions do not emerge from the study, try to summarize the main results.
The introduction was well structured and shows the necessity for this research. The aim of the paper is clear at the end of the introduction.
At the methods section, there are some questions that should be review. About inclusion criteria, which are the health problems could be excluded? About the structure, you should explain again the study design according to the title, where the research was developed, and the flow chart should be included at the beginning of the results epigraph.
Results are clear although table 1 is too expanded, I do not know if it would be possible to be synthesized in some way. Discussion summarize and explain in a good way the finding. It would be interesting to discuss differences between ages in your study. Conclusions were correct but can be more concise some of the phrases do not emerge from the study. Some ideas could be included at the end of the discussion epigraph as future lines.
Author Response
I really appreciate the opportunity to review this manuscript entitled “Longitudinal variations of body characteristics in Italian elite adolescent football players: a pilot study” This is important to explore this relationship in this population. I remark some issues (most of them in methods) in order to improve the quality of this manuscript.
A: Dear reviewer, thank you for your time and effort. We sincerely appreciate your comments and have improved the manuscript with your suggestions.
Tittle should contain the study design, if you read “a pilot study” you first think about and experimental study which contains an intervention. It should be more appropriate to name this study “observational or longitudinal study”. Abstract is clear but should be improved, conclusions do not emerge from the study, try to summarize the main results.
A: Thank you for your comment. We improved the title and abstract following your suggestions.
The introduction was well structured and showed the necessity for this research. The aim of the paper is clear at the end of the introduction.
A: Thank you for your comment.
At the methods section, there are some questions that should be review. About inclusion criteria, which are the health problems could be excluded? About the structure, you should explain again the study design according to the title, where the research was developed, and the flow chart should be included at the beginning of the results epigraph.
A: Thank you for your comment. We improved the methods section following your suggestions.
Results are clear although table 1 is too expanded, I do not know if it would be possible to be synthesized in some way. Discussion summarize and explain in a good way the finding. It would be interesting to discuss differences between ages in your study. Conclusions were correct but can be more concise some of the phrases do not emerge from the study. Some ideas could be included at the end of the discussion epigraph as future lines.
A: Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, it is difficult to exclude information from Table 1; we retain it is relevant. We improved the other sections following your suggestions.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled “Longitudinal variations of body characteristics in Italian elite adolescent football players: a pilot study” submitted to Applied Sciences.
This manuscript is within the scope of Applied Sciences, is well conducted, is well written, and also is very interesting in its context.
Please, consider the following minor comments:
Introduction:
- Line 33: To avoid confusion with American football, please rephrase to read:
"Football, also known as soccer, is the world’s most popular sport….”. This clarification will help international readers immediately recognise which form of football you are talking about.
- To provide a clearer and more comprehensive context, add a small paragraph to explain why it is important to investigate the relationship between anthropometric changes and physical performance in football and what previous studies have contributed to this area.
Anthropometric measurement:
- There may be concerns about the accuracy of leg length calculations. The authors should clarify how they ensured a consistent sitting position for all participants and whether standard procedures (e.g. adjustment of seat height or use of anthropometric chairs designed for such measurements) were used to minimise variability.
Statistical methods:
- Please indicate which programme was used to analyse the variables (SPSS, R...).
Results:
- Consider adding some graphics to make the results easier to understand.
Discussion:
- Add an introductory paragraph to the discussion, explicitly restating the main findings in relation to your original aims or hypotheses.
Conclusion:
- Add a small paragraph with practical implications, explaining how coaches, trainers or sports scientists can apply the key findings.
Author Response
I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled “Longitudinal variations of body characteristics in Italian elite adolescent football players: a pilot study” submitted to Applied Sciences.
This manuscript is within the scope of Applied Sciences, is well conducted, is well written, and also is very interesting in its context.
A: Dear reviewer, thank you for your time and effort. We sincerely appreciate your comments and have improved the manuscript with your suggestions.
Please, consider the following minor comments:
Introduction:
- Line 33: To avoid confusion with American football, please rephrase to read:
"Football, also known as soccer, is the world’s most popular sport….”. This clarification will help international readers immediately recognise which form of football you are talking about.
A: Thank you for your comment. We added it.
- To provide a clearer and more comprehensive context, add a small paragraph to explain why it is important to investigate the relationship between anthropometric changes and physical performance in football and what previous studies have contributed to this area.
A: Thank you for your comment. We improved the introduction section.
Anthropometric measurement:
- There may be concerns about the accuracy of leg length calculations. The authors should clarify how they ensured a consistent sitting position for all participants and whether standard procedures (e.g. adjustment of seat height or use of anthropometric chairs designed for such measurements) were used to minimise variability.
A: Thank you for your comment. We added it.
Statistical methods:
- Please indicate which programme was used to analyse the variables (SPSS, R...).
A: Thank you for your comment. We added it.
Results:
- Consider adding some graphics to make the results easier to understand.
A: Thank you for your comment. Although we agree that some graphics could have a direct link with results, we worry that our results are full of content. Adding other graphs could make this section too long.
Discussion:
- Add an introductory paragraph to the discussion, explicitly restating the main findings in relation to your original aims or hypotheses.
A: Thank you for your comment. We added it.
Conclusion:
- Add a small paragraph with practical implications, explaining how coaches, trainers or sports scientists can apply the key findings.
A: Thank you for your comment. We added it.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for your submission. Your write-up covers all areas in sufficient detail for your study to be replicated. Your statistical analysis is rigorous. This is a robust study.
The only amendment that I would call for is for you to make a comment on how the participants' training may have altered during Covid-19. Would you have anticipated different results if their training had remained on course (assuming it didn't)?
You might have given an indication of what research needs to follow on from this study.
It is very satisfying to see such a longitudinal study being undertaken. We certainly need more of them.
Author Response
Thank you for your submission. Your write-up covers all areas in sufficient detail for your study to be replicated. Your statistical analysis is rigorous. This is a robust study.
A: Dear reviewer, thank you for your time and effort. We sincerely appreciated your comments.
The only amendment that I would call for is for you to make a comment on how the participants' training may have altered during Covid-19. Would you have anticipated different results if their training had remained on course (assuming it didn't)?
A: Thank you for your comment. We added some information in lines 76-77. As we reported, training conditions have not been affected by the pandemic emergency. Some players have been infected by COVID-19 and stopped for weeks or months. However, the same players changed sports and have been engaged from lower clubs, so they did not affect our results because they were excluded by the follow-up (t1).
You might have given an indication of what research needs to follow on from this study.
A: Thank you for your comment. We improved discussions and conclusions to highlight practical applications and possible future investigations.
It is very satisfying to see such a longitudinal study being undertaken. We certainly need more of them.
