Physiological Profile Assessment and Self-Measurement of Healthy Students through Remote Protocol during COVID-19 Lockdown
, Lavinia Falese, Annalisa D’Ermo *,†, Beatrice Tosti, Stefano Corrado, Alice Iannaccone, Pierluigi Diotaiuti and Angelo Rodio
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
Thank you for the opportunity to evaluate your paper titled: Physiological Profile Assessment And Self-Measurement of Healty Students Through Remote Protocol during COVID-19 Lock Down
Follow my reviews:
Introduction
Please, let clear the level of novelty of your study. What is the new content that it brings for the field?
Participants
Please, report the statistical power for included sample.
Table 1
Table 1 could be more informative if you can present comparisons between male and female gender. Please, adjust it.
Discussion
The discussion needs to be divided in paragraphs to more readable. Further, some sentences must be rewrote, like: For 236 example, several studies that considered a pool of cancer survivors patients conducted 237 during the pandemic have reported similar results [42,43] - You report that "several studies have reporting similar results; however you cite only two studies. Please, reorganize coherence and cohesion along your discussion.
Add limitations and strengths in the end of the discussion. Finally, add research perspectives.
Conclusion
Summarize the conclusion. It is too long.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English needs an extensive review to improve objectivity and text clarity.
Author Response
Introduction
COMMENT 1: Please, let clear the level of novelty of your study. What is the new content that it brings for the field?
RESPONSE 1: Thank you for your comment. We examined the feasibility and accuracy of remotely administered physical tests compared to those conducted in the laboratory. This comparison allowed us to demonstrate that self-administered tests can achieve an acceptable margin of error (5% to 10%) compared to in-person tests. This evidence is particularly significant in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, where access to physical testing facilities has been limited. In addition, the results suggest that remote testing may be a valid method for tailoring training programs to individual physiological characteristics. Our research, therefore, not only confirms the reliability of remote testing, but also highlights its potential in the area of personalizing fitness interventions during restrictive situations.
Participants
COMMENT 2: Please, report the statistical power for the included sample.
RESPONSE 2: Thanks for your comment. Spearman's and Kendall's nonparametric analysis have been added, and we have included additional detail in the methods of our statistical analysis.
Table 1
COMMENT 3: Table 1 could be more informative if you can present comparisons between male and female gender. Please, adjust it.
RESPONSE 3: Thank you for your comment, we reworked Table 1 as requested.
Discussion
COMMENT 4: The discussion needs to be divided in paragraphs to more readable. Further, some sentences must be rewrote, like: For 236 example, several studies that considered a pool of cancer survivors patients conducted 237 during the pandemic have reported similar results [42,43] - You report that "several studies have reporting similar results; however you cite only two studies. Please, reorganize coherence and cohesion along your discussion.
Add limitations and strengths in the end of the discussion. Finally, add research perspectives.
RESPONSE 4: Thank you once again for yet another helpful suggestion. We supplemented the text section with additional references to that topic to give more coherence to what has been said and we reorganised the discussion as requested.
Conclusion
COMMENT 5: Summarize the conclusion. It is too long.
RESPONSE 5: Thank you for the suggestion. We have rewritten and summarised the conclusions according to your suggestions.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for opportunity for review of this study.
In the introduction, paragraphs should be divided around the central sentence for readability.
After defining physical fitness, the definition of physical activity is mentioned, so content on the relationship between the two should be added.
Before the fact that there was a decrease in PA during COVID-19, the basis for problems that may arise due to the decrease in PA should be presented.
Present a specific research hypothesis or research question.
Can you provide information on how well the participants learned the measurement method through training?
Since the degree of familiarity with the measurement method through training can affect the research results, it is thought that information on this should be provided.
More detailed descriptions should be given on how randomization was done.
As with the introduction, the results and discussion should be divided into paragraphs centered around the main results.
Can you see the difference in results by gender?
Can you see the difference by bachelor and master?
The above information is thought to be helpful in suggesting specific measures.
A note should be provided on the abbreviations used in the table.
The detailed discussion of results should be omitted from the discussion.
There is no section on limitations of the study and suggestions for investing in platforms and technologies for remote test administration
Author Response
COMMENT 1: In the introduction, paragraphs should be divided around the central sentence for readability.
RESPONSE 1: Thank you for the advice, we have made the changes you requested. Effectively the text in one paragraph was taking on an unreadable appearance.
COMMENT 2: After defining physical fitness, the definition of physical activity is mentioned, so content on the relationship between the two should be added.
RESPONSE 2: Thank you for your pertinent comment, we have added some information about this relationship in the introduction section.
COMMENT 3: Before the fact that there was a decrease in PA during COVID-19, the basis for problems that may arise due to the decrease in PA should be presented.
RESPONSE 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We have added information about this in the introduction.
COMMENT 4: Present a specific research hypothesis or research question.
RESPONSE 4: Thank you for your comments. We have taken care to better clarify our research objective in the introduction.
COMMENT 5: Can you provide information on how well the participants learned the measurement method through training? Since the degree of familiarity with the measurement method through training can affect the research results, it is thought that information on this should be provided.
RESPONSE 5: You are indeed right, we had not thought about assessing the degree of learning and familiarity with the test administration, but your observation is definitely something we need to take into account for future experiments.
COMMENT 6: More detailed descriptions should be given on how randomization was done.
RESPONSE 6: The same software was used for randomisation as for statistical analysis (SPSS = Statistical Package for Social Science). We have included this information in the protocol section.
COMMENT 7: As with the introduction, the results and discussion should be divided into paragraphs centered around the main results.
RESPONSE 7: Thank you for the advice. We have made the changes to the text that are in line with your wishes for a more readable text.
COMMENT 8: Can you see the difference in results by gender? Can you see the difference by bachelor and master? The above information is thought to be helpful in suggesting specific measures.
RESPONSE 8: We appreciate your comments, but in our specific case, our main goal was not to evaluate overall performance, but rather to investigate the consistency of the test. Accordingly, it would be useful to investigate whether discrepancies in error and accuracy between men and women fluctuate according to experimental conditions.
COMMENT 9: A note should be provided on the abbreviations used in the table.
RESPONSE 9: Thank you. We have added a note in the caption of each table to make them easier to read.
COMMENT 10: The detailed discussion of results should be omitted from the discussion.
RESPONSE 10: Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have carefully revised the discussion to streamline the content, removing any unnecessary details. By incorporating the changes you suggested, we were able to better focus and emphasize the central goal of our work, providing greater clarity and consistency.
COMMENT 11: There is no section on limitations of the study and suggestions for investing in platforms and technologies for remote test administration
RESPONSE 11: Thank you again for your suggestion. Now, in the text, there are both sections.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors, after revising your paper, I consider it for publication.
Please, in case this paper to be published, you need to carefully improve the English quality of the text, maybe consulting an English professional to help you.
No further comments.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish needs major improvements in case if the manuscript is accepted for publication.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe comments were generally well reflected. It is regrettable that the results analysis according to the characteristics of the research participants was not presented.
