All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
Your manuscript has been accepted for publication. Congratulations!
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Mike Climstein, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
2nd revision: The authors followed the advice of the comments. So from my point of view the paper is ready for publication.
2nd revision: The authors followed the advice of the comments. So from my point of view the paper is ready for publication.
2nd revision: The authors followed the advice of the comments. So from my point of view the paper is ready for publication.
2nd revision: The authors followed the advice of the comments. So from my point of view the paper is ready for publication.
Dear Authors,
The reviewers and I have completed our evaluation of your manuscript and recommend a major revision before re-submission.
Please review the comments and resubmit your revised manuscript.
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff comments are addressed in a response letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.
Abstract
Line 24-26: Describe the sample (age, weight, BMI, etc).
Line 31-33: Describe the exact p-values.
Detail in the abstract what type of population the study corresponds to (healthy subjects, physically inactive, etc).
Introduction:
Line 42-47: update the bibliographic citations.
The introduction is very long and makes it difficult to read, I suggest the authors reduce the size of the paragraphs.
Materials and methods:
Line 121: Was the clinical trial registered? Does it have a registration code?
Line 137: Is the device valid and reliable? What is the sampling frequency of the device? What other technical characteristics does it have?
Line 152: What was the criterion for progressing intensity in the maximal strength protocol.
Line 199: The authors mention that the CMJ is a reliable test, which bibliographic reference supports this statement?
Results
Please place the exact p-values and to 3 decimal places.
Table 1
What was the progress criterion in the EMS training protocol?
The publication is written in good English. The structure is clear and background information with reference to EMS and strength training is given. The aim, methods, and the study design are precisely described.
The experimental design is relevant and meaningful. The methods and tests are well described and details are attached. It is interesting that the EMS group trains daily. In many publcations the number of training units per week ist clearly restricted to fewer input (1-2 training units/week). Can you explain why daily EMS training was performed?
A lot of tests were perfomed and all data for both investigated groups were offered and statistically sound interpreted. In the discussion, the results were discussed with reference to many other publications in the field of EMS and strength training.
The conclusion could be more precise. It is not clear how following studies shall be designed in order to optimize the outcome. Training frequency, loading, combination of EMS and strength methods etc. are missing.
The publication is clearly structured and the results and conclusions are understandable. Please explain the design of daily training of the EMS group and be more precise on the conclusions when offering study designs of new studies.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.