An Evaluation of the Accuracy and Precision of Jump Height Measurements Using Different Technologies and Analytical Methods
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
General comments:
The authors conducted a study to address an important issue regarding accuracy of various methods to measure vertical jump height. With many options available practitioners may have confusion over the most appropriate device given their needs as well as time or financial constraints. Well the authors thoroughly describe issues surrounding the measurement of vertical jump I believe that the introduction and discussion can be revised for clarity and conciseness. Additionally, please consider the bland-altman analysis as I believe it will strengthen your analysis.
Specific comments:
Abstract
-First sentence would emphasize that you tested a variety of devices. Each device does incorporate different approaches to measure CMJ but that can be discussed later.
-Should mention that you use 3D measured displacement as gold standard/reference value.
-Last sentence – need 1 more space before ‘This study…’
Introduction
-Generally – the introduction can be written in a more concise manner. I’d recommend the authors consider referring readers to a text such as Winter’s text ‘Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement’ for many issues discussed regarding the technical aspects of measuring vertical jump.
-First 2 sentences can be removed. They are not enough for a paragraph and in my opinion the sentence starting ‘Vertical jumping…’ is better to start with.
-You should also state that jump performance is commonly used to assess athlete potential. Many professional sport organizations (i.e. NFL, NBA, etc) use the vertical jump before drafts.
-Paragraph 2 – Another point that can be made is that with the rise of wearable devices and more commercial technology propriety algorithms are used. This is relevant as they may use the same components to measure VJ the algorithms often differ and can results in differing results.
-Paragraph 3 – this information can be incorporated into paragraph 2
Methods
Procedures – was the entire warm-up 5 min or was the treadmill running 5 min?
-Need to define abbreviations before using (i.e. QMS, FP, MP, ABJ, etc.). Please add and review for others.
-The procedures were appropriate; however, for the analysis I have some concerns if the appropriate statistical approach was used. If the primary aim was to assess agreement of various methods with a reference then Bland-Altman analysis would be appropriate. This will allow the authors to report mean and proportional bias. I think adding this analysis would greatly improve the paper.
Results
-Were the jump height values normally distributed? From the range and mean provided I am thinking they were not
-See comment above about the bland-altman analysis
Discussion
-General: The first 2 paragraphs are not needed to start the discussion. Please start the discussion by stating the main findings of the study in a single paragraph. Then you can discuss how your findings compare to previous literature.
-Please add limitations and potentially delimitations to the discussion
-Conclusion – The point you briefly raise about ensuring appropriate protocols are used regardless of device is worthy of expanding upon.
Author Response
Dear sirs
Enclosed there is a pdf with the answers to reviewer 1
Best regards
Filipe Conceição
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article - "An evaluation of the accuracy and precision of jump height measurements using different technologies and analytical methods" is devoted to the comparison of different methods for determining the height of the jump. For this purpose, five technically different methods were used simultaneously, and their results were analyzed. The particular value of this work lies in the fact that this analysis includes modern indirect methods for determining the height of the jump, which use significantly different mathematical algorithms.
The study is well planned and carried out. The illustrations (Figures 3 and 4), as well as table 1, are more than demonstrative. The results obtained have an obvious paradox - the most primitive method is also the most accurate. Yes, the authors, of course, do not ignore its significant limitations, which did not affect this experiment.
The conclusions of the article allow other researchers who are faced with the task of studying the height of a jump to have a practical guide to choosing an adequate method of measurement (calculation).
The work is written with high quality. I have not found any inconsistencies or errors.
Additional comments：
The main purpose of this article is to study and compare a number of both widely used methods and relatively new methods for indirectly obtaining the value of the jump height.
The actual topic of measuring the height of a jump is not original. The design of this study is original, when the jump height was measured by five methods at once. At the same time, several of them used indirect, indirect and calculated data.
Compared to already published papers, the authors applied simultaneous registration in five different ways. Moreover, their physical foundations were significantly different.
The authors used their own approach to calculating the jump height from the acceleration data using their own filtering method to minimize errors.
The authors of the study provided clear evidence of the feasibility of each method under the conditions in which the study was conducted. This makes it possible to more accurately determine by what method the jump height can be measured, depending on the research tasks and technical capabilities.
The analyzed literature sources meet the stated research objective.
Author Response
Dear Sir,
In response to the appreciation of the submitted manuscript we would like to thank the reviewer for his/her comprehensive and important review of the manuscript. The authors appreciate the feedback provided by the reviewer.
Best regards
Filipe Conceição
