Coordination and variability of muscular activation in male athletes with and without subacromial impingement syndrome: A case-control study

Rahman Sheikhhoseini; Sajjad Abdollahi; Mohammad Salsali; Mehrdad Anbarian; Trent M. Guess

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0319048

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 22, 2024
22 Nov 2024 Author Response https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319048.r001
2 Jan 2025 Decision Letter - Zulkarnain Jaafar, Editor PONE-D-24-52678Coordination and Variability of Muscular Activation in Male Athletes with and Without Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Case-Control StudyPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Sheikhhoseini, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. ============================== ACADEMIC EDITOR: Dear Author, please attend to all the comments provided by the reviewers and do the necessary corrections. ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 16 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols . We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Zulkarnain Jaafar Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met. Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript. 3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: “Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) under project no. 4013596” Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: Dear Authors, Special thanks for your manuscript submission and to the editors for providing the opportunity to review this work. The study, titled Coordination and Variability of Muscular Activation in Male Athletes with and Without Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Case-Control Study,' aims to investigate and compare muscular coordination and variability during repetitive shoulder movements among athletes with and without SIS. The manuscript is engaging, and here are some insights and suggestions: - This research has the potential to interest the PLOS ONE readership but requires significant improvement. - The abstract is unclear. Enhance it by clearly stating the study's aim, methodology, and conclusions for better clarity and comprehension. - The authors investigate “the coordination and variability of muscular activation” using NNMF to extract muscle synergies. Additionally, since simultaneous activation around the shoulder joint can provide valuable insights into joint stabilization and movement precision, consider incorporating muscle co-activation analysis into the study. - Use a single method (either tables or figures) to present results; avoid redundant representations, such as the overlap between Table 2 and Figure 3, or Table 3 and Figure 4. - Revise the placement of Figure 6 and its legend to improve readability and alignment with the text. - While the paper is well-illustrated and presented, it should be significantly reduced in length to focus on content directly relevant to the study's aim. - The study's limitations are only briefly mentioned in the abstract. It is preferable to introduce a separate section for limitations and future work before the conclusions section. - Although the conclusions section addresses the study's aim, it is too general. Improve it by incorporating the key findings and important results from the study. Reviewer #2: 1) It is a interesting study however the authors need to elaborate why they have choosen the muscle synergies measurement and notmuscle activity? 2) what advatage it offers over the muscle acitvity? 3)the authors are advised to add comparision with muscle acitvities in SIS vide refercne "Sharma, S., Hussain, M. E., & Sharma, S. (2021). Effects of exercise therapy plus manual therapy on muscle activity, latency timing and SPADI score in shoulder impingement syndrome. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 44, 101390." Phadke, V., & Ludewig, P. M. (2013). Study of the scapular muscle latency and deactivation time in people with and without shoulder impingement. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 23(2), 469-475. 4) the authors are requested to how weill the clinical physiotherpist use their findings to obtain good outcome ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy . Reviewer #1: Yes: Abdel-Rahman Akl Reviewer #2: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Review PONE-D-24-52678.pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319048.r002
Revision 1
4 Jan 2025 Author Response Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Thank you for considering our work. ________________________________________ 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Thank you for considering our work. ________________________________________ 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Thank you for considering our work. ________________________________________ 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Thank you for considering our work. ________________________________________ 5. Review Comments to the Author Reviewer #1: Dear Authors, Special thanks for your manuscript submission and to the editors for providing the opportunity to review this work. The study, titled Coordination and Variability of Muscular Activation in Male Athletes with and Without Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Case-Control Study,' aims to investigate and compare muscular coordination and variability during repetitive shoulder movements among athletes with and without SIS. The manuscript is engaging, and here are some insights and suggestions: - This research has the potential to interest the PLOS ONE readership but requires significant improvement. - The abstract is unclear. Enhance it by clearly stating the study's aim, methodology, and conclusions for better clarity and comprehension. Thank you for your valuable comment. All parts were amended and highlighted. - The authors investigate “the coordination and variability of muscular activation” using NNMF to extract muscle synergies. Additionally, since simultaneous activation around the shoulder joint can provide valuable insights into joint stabilization and movement precision, consider incorporating muscle co-activation analysis into the study. Given that this study was not one of the primary objectives of this research and that the number of variables examined in this study is relatively large, this issue has not been examined. However, we have added this valuable point in the research limitations section. - Use a single method (either tables or figures) to present results; avoid redundant representations, such as the overlap between Table 2 and Figure 3, or Table 3 and Figure 4. Thank you for your valuable comment. Duplicates have been removed and necessary changes have been made to the text. - Revise the placement of Figure 6 and its legend to improve readability and alignment with the text. Thank you for your valuable comment. It is amended. - While the paper is well-illustrated and presented, it should be significantly reduced in length to focus on content directly relevant to the study's aim. Thank you for your valuable comment. Two figures were removed to shorten the text, and the authors also tried to summarize the text as much as possible. The word count of the article is based on the journal's standards. However, the large number of variables and the volume of results have increased the length of the article. - The study's limitations are only briefly mentioned in the abstract. It is preferable to introduce a separate section for limitations and future work before the conclusions section. Thank you for your valuable comment. The limitation section has been added to the text. - Although the conclusions section addresses the study's aim, it is too general. Improve it by incorporating the key findings and important results from the study. Thank you for your valuable comment. The conclusion changed. Reviewer #2: 1) It is a interesting study however the authors need to elaborate why they have choosen the muscle synergies measurement and notmuscle activity? Thank you for your valuable comment. We tried to add some text to introduction to address this issue. 2) what advatage it offers over the muscle acitvity? Thank you for your valuable comment. We tried to add some text to introduction to address this issue. 3)the authors are advised to add comparision with muscle acitvities in SIS vide refercne "Sharma, S., Hussain, M. E., & Sharma, S. (2021). Effects of exercise therapy plus manual therapy on muscle activity, latency timing and SPADI score in shoulder impingement syndrome. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 44, 101390." Thank you for your valuable comment. Added as reference. Phadke, V., & Ludewig, P. M. (2013). Study of the scapular muscle latency and deactivation time in people with and without shoulder impingement. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 23(2), 469-475. Thank you for your valuable comment. Added as reference. 4) the authors are requested to how weill the clinical physiotherpist use their findings to obtain good outcome Thank you for your valuable comment. It is added to the discussion section, a paragraph before the limitations. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Point by point response to reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319048.r003
27 Jan 2025 Decision Letter - Zulkarnain Jaafar, Editor Coordination and Variability of Muscular Activation in Male Athletes with and Without Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Case-Control Study PONE-D-24-52678R1 Dear Dr. Sheikhhoseini, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Zulkarnain Jaafar Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 6. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: It is preferable to introduce a separate section for limitations and future work before the conclusions section. Reviewer #2: the authors have addressed all the concerns and it si good clinical study. in future if the authors study gets publsihed they should plan a DELPHI study ****** 7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy . Reviewer #1: Yes: Abdel-Rahman Akl Reviewer #2: No ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319048.r004
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Zulkarnain Jaafar, Editor PONE-D-24-52678R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Sheikhhoseini, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Zulkarnain Jaafar Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319048.r005

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .