Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Identification o f motives and barriers to physical activity of Polish young mothers  
 
Version: 3 Date: 25 Jun 2020  
 
Reviewer: Longla Terence Acheliu  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Generally, the revised version of th e article is even more difficult to read, probably becaus e of 
the correction tracts and grammar. More adjustments need to be made on this article to improve 
on its quality. As for the grammar, I recommend you use grammarly (if you are not using it). A 
revised version of the article without the tract changes will be better for me. In the following 
section, I will highlight some of the issues that I noted while reading this article.  
Abstract - line 27.....young mothers who gave birth in 2017, not giving bir th.....  
              - line 40 While young mothers...., is it a continuation of the previous sentence?  
             
Introduction - line 16 -17, how is physical exercise essential for morbidity and mortality. Please 
rephrase the sentence  
                    - line 34.....higher socioeconomic status preferred not position  
                    - line 41 -42, what is more......., sentence not clear  
                    - ideally, the introduction should end with the aims/goals/objectives of your study, 
but you removed it . why?  
Methods     - state your study design clearly  
                   - no section on the study variables, definitions (average education, physical activity, 
economic status etc.) and how they were measured  
                   - line 42 Polish women who had liv e births is better than giving birth to living 
children  
                   -  on statistical analysis, you have mentioned the tests that were used which is good 
but you need to state why you used them e.g. students' t -test to compare the mean BMI or 
weight.... ..?. on line 39 -40, you used a software for analysis and not only to calculate averages 
and means. Also, average in statistics is not specific because it could be mean, median or mode. 
so I presume you are talking about mean (state as mean not average).  
                  - in identifying barriers (risk factors) did you conduct a multivariate analysis to 
control for confounders. if yes state under data analysis section of the methods  
                  -  i realized you mentioned something on ethics under the st udy population. Please it 
should stand on its own at the end of the methods section  
                  - i realized you interviewed your participants by phone call, so how did you measure 
certain variables such as height and weight and this should come under d ata collection procedure 
and not study population.  
Results      -  line 17 include years on the mean age  
                  - in this section,the sub topic ''results of conducted analysis'' is not necessary because 
you are talking about results section. Also you ha ve no sub topics, like levels of physical activity 
between urban and rural women, barriers of physical activity etc.  
Discussion    -  difficult to follow  
Conclusion - you mentioned some recommendations here, so the topic should include 
recommendations  
                  
These are some of the comments that I have but there are a lot more.  
 
 
 
 
Publons Reviewer Recognition . Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to  
Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advanta ge of this service,  
please click on the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed  
manuscript, name of the journal, and date of your review submission (the “Review Data ”) will  
then be transmitted to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered  
at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile as per your  
settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons, you will receive an email from  
them asking you to register in order for them to be able to recognize your review on your new  
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative metadata for the benefit of  
Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such info rmation. For  
example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile published on its  
webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate reviewers.  
Please find the details of processing in Publon s’ privacy policy https://publons.com/about/terms  
 
Yes 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which con trols are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recom mend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I recommend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in t he past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisat ion that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursemen ts, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to t his paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
Reviewer Publication Consent. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open 
Access  Creative Commons CC -BY License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 ) if this 
manuscript  is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the 
published  report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be 
published.  If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office 
before completing  the review.  If you wish, you can include your name in you r published report. 
Please note you must  decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm 
this decision whenever  prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to 
publish your name.  
 
I agree to the terms of the CC -BY 4.0 license; please publish my name with my report.