Title: The Effect of Menstrual Cycle on Inter-Joint Coordination Variability during Roundhouse
Kicks in Taekwondo
Version: 1 Date: 14 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
BMC Women's Health
The Effect of Menstrual Cycle on Inter-Joint Coordination Variability during Roundhouse Kicks
in Taekwondo
Reviewer's Comments
In the submitted manuscript, the author(s) examined the effect of menstrual cycle on the
coordination patterns of the roundhouse kicks in Taekwondo. Twenty female athletes were
examined in three different phases of the menstrual cycle: the follicular, the ovulatory, and the
luteal phase. A motion capture system recorded 9 roundhouse kick attempts in each phase. The
results of the statistical analysis revealed did not show significant differences in joint ROM for
the three menstrual cycles, nor differences regarding the intralimb coordination patterns.
The submission is within the scope of the Journal. However, there are several topics that need
to be addressed, as mentioned in the following General and Specific Comments.
General Comments
• Introduction: Further elaboration is required for the coordination, the coordination variability
and the importance of angle/angle coupling (preferably after L58). Also, at L79, provide specific
details about the exact changes in knee laxity, balance, etc. in each separate menstrual cycle
phase and how these changes in knee laxity, balance, etc. have an impact in the roundhouse
kick technique. The latter can provide a more solid basis for the third hypothesis of the study
(LL103-105).
• Participants: Provide the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although twenty (n =20) are
mentioned in the Abstract (L25) and the Methods (L108), twenty-two (n = 22, with 2 being
excluded) are mentioned in the limitations of the study (L228). Thus, the inclusion/exclusion
criteria must be defined and the total number of athletes participating in the study should be
mentioned. Also, what was the rationale for not excluding the athletes with unstable menstrual
cycles (LL233-234)? Could this tamper the results of the study?
• Methods: Were the assumption criteria met for the conduction of the SPM1d analysis (see
also: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110451)? In addition, how was dominancy (L142)
defined?
• Discussion: In L172, an increase is mentioned, but without statistical evidence. These
statements should be rephrased. In addition, further elaboration is required about the mechanisms
that may provoked the outcomes of the study (LL215-221).
• Conclusion: Following the previous comment, the statement in LL241-243 should be revised.
• Finally, the study could be benefited from balance, joint ROM tests and clinical knee stability
tests in each menstrual cycle phase to provide an in-depth discussion of the current findings.
Specific comments:
Introduction
• anatomical regions [23].
Methods
• LL126-127: was the height of the target individualized?
• LL136-141: was the speed of the kick self-selected? The percentages mentioned were
thresholds for the movement (meaning that the athletes had to equally divide the time to perform
the kick into these four phases) or are a rough description of the sequence of segment actions?
• L154: provide the estimator of effect size and its thresholds.
Results
• Provided the results for F and the effect size.
Discussion
• L192: It is suggested to use another term instead of “dominance”.
References
• Not all journal titles are abbreviated (refs #1, #6, #7, #8, #13, #25, #29, #37, #44, #46, #47,
#49, #51)