Title: Effects of oral contraceptive use on muscle strength, muscle thickness, and fiber size and
composition in young women undergoing 12 weeks of strength training: A cohort study
Version: 2 Date: 15 Oct 2021
Reviewer:  Hamid Arazi
Reviewer's report:
The reviewer’s comments on the paper are as follows:
I have reviewed the research article entitled “Effects of oral contraceptive use on muscle
strength, diameter, and fiber composition in female young adults undergoing 12 weeks of
submaximal strength training”. It is interesting topic and totally, this manuscript is well
organized and written. There are just a few points of clarification that need to be addresses.
Therefore, I recommend that the manuscript must be revised before it can be accepted for
publication. Here are my comments:
GENERAL
The subject matter is within the scope of the BMC Women's Health. According to my opinion,
this study has appropriate scientific actuality and can provide further evidence for the possible
effect of oral contraceptive use on the macroscopic (Fmax, MD, and Fmax/MD) and microscopic
(NO and MFD) parameters of type 2 muscle fibers. Thus, this paper has important implications
regarding the impact of OC use during 12 weeks of moderate resistance training on the muscle
strength, diameter, and fiber composition which can be considered especially for healthy young
females. However, as those comments were of specific nature, which can be modified or
improved under revision. Therefore, I suggest that this manuscript could be considered for
publication after inclusion major corrections based on the comments.
SPECIFIC
1. In the abstract: Please mention in the methods section the women who participated in this
study were healthy and young. In the results, p value need to be added for significant changes.
Also, please remove words of ((In conclusion)) in the results.
2. In the Materials and methods: Participants’ characteristics is written either the text or the table
1. Please remove them from the text. The table is enough.
3. The participants were either untrained or moderately trained. Why did the researchers select
them from trained or untrained population? Training status can impact the results. Moderately
trained women exercised for less than 2 h per week for what time (how many months or years?)
What kind of training? What range of intensity? These should be clarified in the methods.
4. On page 3: The authors wrote: ((dose of ethinyl estradiol was between 20~30#)). Is there the
reference for it? Please specify.
5. Why the strength training include single exercise (leg press)? In the real world, it is not
applicable and can’t be generalized. Please explain.
6. Why the intensity of training was kept unchanged during the three sets? Practically, it is not
conductible to perform 12 repetitions at the first set with 85% of maximum isometric force.
Exercise with the leg press machine is isotonic (comprised of concentric and eccentric actions of
muscles) action. Considering this action, why did the researchers determine maximum isometric
force rather than isotonic test of 1RM (one repetition maximum)? Do you have any reference
for it? Please describe.
7. Why was overload considered as absolute value of 10 kg? Considering the individual
differences and different training history or experience, adding this value for all of participants
couldn’t be correct. Why didn’t the researchers take into account 1RM percent?
8. How were the participants’ diets controlled? What nutritional considerations were
recommended to them by researchers? There is no any explanations about it in the text of the
manuscript. Please add the required information regarding it. These points are important and
have remarkable influences on the strength training outcomes.
9. What time of day was the exercise protocol carried out? Please clarify in the Experimental
Sessions.
10. Please add body fat percent of subjects if available.
11. On page 5, statistical analysis section: Please correct ((Kolmogorov-Smimov)) to
((Kolmogorov-Smirnov)).
12. Of 50 references, many of them are old and it is required to add the newer references relevant
to the title in recent years.