Next Article in Journal
Analysis of the Associations between Arthritis and Fall Histories in Korean Adults
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of a Post-Operative Rehabilitation Program in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Pilot Study
Previous Article in Journal
Systematic Review of Clinical Applications of CAD/CAM Technology for Craniofacial Implants Placement and Manufacturing of Nasal Prostheses
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effects of Motor Imagery Training on Balance and Gait in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study
Article
Peer-Review Record

Associations between Daily Movement Distribution, Bone Structure, Falls, and Fractures in Older Adults: A Compositional Data Analysis Study

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(7), 3757; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph18073757
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(7), 3757; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph18073757
Received: 12 March 2021 / Revised: 29 March 2021 / Accepted: 1 April 2021 / Published: 3 April 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exercise, Health and Disease Management)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The QCT exam involves a higher dose of ionizing radiation than a DXA exam. The authors should convince me of the need for QCT compared to DXA in the context of their research. After all, the main conclusion of the work presented by the authors is that the total BMD at 38% of the tibia is positively influenced by MVPA. The authors must explain why it may also be important to point out that cortical thickness at 38% of the tibia is positively influenced by MVPA.

More details about the data regression would be useful to better understand the value of the results.

I suggest improving the quality of figure 1 because it is unreadable

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear sir, the work appears to be a part of a very broad research project by the authors.  The study was approved by "ethics committee from Hospital Universitario Fundacion de alcorcon", but the study was carried out in other city or region. None of the authors appear as member of that hospital or of any associated research center. This is an importan irregularity. Especially in studies where the study population is subjected to significant radiological exposure, rigorous control is necessary. This aspect should be  clarified.

Data on study populatios, its selection etc must be clarified. The authors refer to a previous study (ref 26) that is not easily accesible to understand the methodology. The characteristics (biodemographics, clinics, treatments etc) of the population play a important role. The choice of the tibial bone should be explained. Other authors have used the same bone, but it is true that other bone segments are the most affected by osteoporosis and changes in bone mineral density. The differences between men and women have already been highlighted in previous studies. The problem that a significant physical activity (MVPA) can entail in the most fragile age groups should be discussed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

 

The article is well structured. The introduction explores the results of other studies and allows you to understand why this study was carried out.
The method and techniques are clear and presented with rigour.
The results are pertinent and the discussion allows for a deeper understanding of them. 

I think it can be published in the current format.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks, the work has improved.

Back to TopTop