Parents’ Inadequate Estimate of Their Children’s Objectively Physical Activity Level
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. While the manuscript is well written, the findings are consistent with the current literature as referenced by the authors. As it stands, it offers minimal extension of our current knowledge although it does validate it (refer to Discussion, lines 204 and 205 and references 22-25). However, if the authors are willing, this research would be enhanced and contribute to the literature with the collection of additional data , for example, 1) by interviewing the parents (phase two) to inquire how they estimated the activity level of their child (and use this qualitative knowledge in a subsequent study to provide the rubric to measure their child’s and their own PA); and/or 2) by interviewing parents about perceptions of and expectations of children’s activity overall getting to the documented decline in activity toward adulthood and the high level of activity in early childhood (as referenced in the Discussion page 8/13).
I offer the following suggestions for the authors’ consideration.
The title is intriguing as a question but long. Consider a title that shares the main findings of the research, namely parents are poor estimators of their preschool children’s duration of MV physical activity or parents engagement with children during PA does not result in more MVPA.
Page 2/13, lines 47/48: This sentence is confusing following the sentence about the child’s social environment created by parents (no reference to inheritance) and then suggests “Therefore, parents transfer inherited physical capital to their children.” Suggest removing the word “inherited” for revising the sentence for clarity.
Page 2/13, line 77: define the term “free-living”
Page 3/13, line 137: Questionnaire: Identify the constructs clearly to be measured with the questions that measured them in the survey ncluding the scale or other response form. If this study were to be replicated, it is not clear how the constructs were measured thus difficult to compare with findings of other studies, which is a general issue with the manuscript.
Did the authors inquire about the biological relationship between child and parent? How many children of each gender participated? What was the SES status of the children’s families? What was the educational level of the parents? Describe the physical living environment of the family (that is, is there space inside and outside to be active or are living spaces small; Is this an urban or rural area)? At what time during the year was the survey administered (i.e., does weather make a difference)? Were all families from Norway or were some families international and thus bring their own cultural expectations for children’s appropriate behavior? For the international reader who does not know Norway as well as for the study itself, these are predictive variables.
The authors suggest in the Discussion that the children come from a wide range of preschools. Consequently, could the type of preschool (i.e., curriculum) influence the children’s behavior during leisure time (most preschool teachers with PA in the curriculum certainly hope so). (In the Discussion (Strengths and Limitations, line 306), the authors suggest that data was collected in the preschools.)
The PA literature is more mature now than even 5 years ago and a number of these variables are predictive of activity. By including them, the authors tease out their contributions in this sample and continue to study emerging differences (or lack thereof).
Page 4/13, line 148: the authors include 122 cases that had missing data to compare to those with complete data (Table 2).Why? How did the authors account for the missing data statistically?
The scatterplots were helpful to illustrated clearly the range of estimations by parents.
Page 8/13, line 250: Please clarify this portion of the sentence: “…and that socialization mechanisms may be more prominent later on.” Does this mean children pay more attention to parents as they mature?
Page 8/13, line 275: define the term “active travel.” Does this mean children walk or ride their bike to their destination?
Page 9/13, line 306…The authors suggest that this is the first to study children’s PA in preschool and leisure in the same study (there are other studies in progress that do measure activity in home and preschool) however, the preschool data was not shared in this study. Including the data from preschool and teacher perceptions would recognize the ecological complexity of studying PA in children and this study. If this data is not included in this manuscript, I suggest removing this sentence.
Please add Implications for Research and for Practice. The conclusions drawn by the authors from the data and shared in the Discussion appear to be appropriate (e.g., concrete measures for parents to help judge physical activity (page 7/13, lines 22 and 23 and first full paragraph on page 8). Because this is not included in this study, discuss this suggestion as implication for further research. Of equal importance is understanding these results as evidence for practice (evidence-based or evidence informed practice) for parents, teachers, health professionals. Offer concrete suggestions of utilization of the results in practice.
Author Response
Comments to reviewers; parents estimation (changes with red in the article)
|
Reviewers comments |
Authors comments |
|
Reviewer 1 |
|
|
As it stands, it offers minimal extension of our current knowledge although it does validate it (refer to Discussion, lines 204 and 205 and references 22-25). However, if the authors are willing, this research would be enhanced and contribute to the literature with the collection of additional data , for example, 1) by interviewing the parents (phase two) to inquire how they estimated the activity level of their child (and use this qualitative knowledge in a subsequent study to provide the rubric to measure their child’s and their own PA); and/or 2) by interviewing parents about perceptions of and expectations of children’s activity overall getting to the documented decline in activity toward adulthood and the high level of activity in early childhood (as referenced in the Discussion page 8/13).
|
We agree that interviewing the parents and/or interviewing parents about perceptions of and expectations of children’s activity overall getting to the documented decline in activity toward adulthood, is a good strategy. It would have been very interesting. However, this could be done in a follow up study and in a new article. The present article is based upon a large number of objectively measured accelerometer data, and we will argue that it can be published as it is. We will argue that the article is unique, using both accelerometer data and parents estimation of their 4-6 year old children.
|
|
The title is intriguing as a question but long. Consider a title that shares the main findings of the research, namely parents are poor estimators of their preschool children’s duration of MV physical activity or parents engagement with children during PA does not result in more MVPA. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 2/13, lines 47/48: This sentence is confusing following the sentence about the child’s social environment created by parents (no reference to inheritance) and then suggests “Therefore, parents transfer inherited physical capital to their children.” Suggest removing the word “inherited” for revising the sentence for clarity.
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 2/13, line 77: define the term “free-living” |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 3/13, line 137: Questionnaire: Identify the constructs clearly to be measured with the questions that measured them in the survey ncluding the scale or other response form. If this study were to be replicated, it is not clear how the constructs were measured thus difficult to compare with findings of other studies, which is a general issue with the manuscript. |
We totally agree. The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Did the authors inquire about the biological relationship between child and parent? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
How many children of each gender participated? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
What was the SES status of the children’s families? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
What was the educational level of the parents? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Describe the physical living environment of the family (that is, is there space inside and outside to be active or are living spaces small; Is this an urban or rural area)? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
At what time during the year was the survey administered (i.e., does weather make a difference)? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Were all families from Norway or were some families international and thus bring their own cultural expectations for children’s appropriate behavior? For the international reader who does not know Norway as well as for the study itself, these are predictive variables. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
The authors suggest in the Discussion that the children come from a wide range of preschools. Consequently, could the type of preschool (i.e., curriculum) influence the children’s behavior during leisure time (most preschool teachers with PA in the curriculum certainly hope so). (In the Discussion (Strengths and Limitations, line 306), the authors suggest that data was collected in the preschools.) The PA literature is more mature now than even 5 years ago and a number of these variables are predictive of activity. By including them, the authors tease out their contributions in this sample and continue to study emerging differences (or lack thereof).
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 4/13, line 148: the authors include 122 cases that had missing data to compare to those with complete data (Table 2).Why? How did the authors account for the missing data statistically?
|
To include as many participants as possible in each of the statistical analyses, an independent t-test was conducted to examine differences in PA levels among children with children with all data (N=122) and children with some missing data according to mother or fathers participation/estimation (N=122). There were no significant differences between the two groups, and the drop was random |
|
The scatterplots were helpful to illustrated clearly the range of estimations by parents. |
We agree |
|
Page 8/13, line 250: Please clarify this portion of the sentence: “…and that socialization mechanisms may be more prominent later on.” Does this mean children pay more attention to parents as they mature? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 8/13, line 275: define the term “active travel.” Does this mean children walk or ride their bike to their destination? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 9/13, line 306…The authors suggest that this is the first to study children’s PA in preschool and leisure in the same study (there are other studies in progress that do measure activity in home and preschool) however, the preschool data was not shared in this study. Including the data from preschool and teacher perceptions would recognize the ecological complexity of studying PA in children and this study. If this data is not included in this manuscript, I suggest removing this sentence. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Please add Implications for Research and for Practice. The conclusions drawn by the authors from the data and shared in the Discussion appear to be appropriate (e.g., concrete measures for parents to help judge physical activity (page 7/13, lines 22 and 23 and first full paragraph on page 8). Because this is not included in this study, discuss this suggestion as implication for further research. Of equal importance is understanding these results as evidence for practice (evidence-based or evidence informed practice) for parents, teachers, health professionals. Offer concrete suggestions of utilization of the results in practice.
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Reviewer 2 |
|
|
I would only suggest adding a few clauses in the conclusion part connecting the findings and the related statements. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Interesting topic and will make both a practical and academic impact on the readers. I have already been inspired by the subject and started planning-related research with my graduate students.
I would only suggest adding a few clauses in the conclusion part connecting the findings and the related statements.
Author Response
Comments to reviewers; parents estimation (changes with red in the article)
|
Reviewers comments |
Authors comments |
|
Reviewer 1 |
|
|
As it stands, it offers minimal extension of our current knowledge although it does validate it (refer to Discussion, lines 204 and 205 and references 22-25). However, if the authors are willing, this research would be enhanced and contribute to the literature with the collection of additional data , for example, 1) by interviewing the parents (phase two) to inquire how they estimated the activity level of their child (and use this qualitative knowledge in a subsequent study to provide the rubric to measure their child’s and their own PA); and/or 2) by interviewing parents about perceptions of and expectations of children’s activity overall getting to the documented decline in activity toward adulthood and the high level of activity in early childhood (as referenced in the Discussion page 8/13).
|
We agree that interviewing the parents and/or interviewing parents about perceptions of and expectations of children’s activity overall getting to the documented decline in activity toward adulthood, is a good strategy. It would have been very interesting. However, this could be done in a follow up study and in a new article. The present article is based upon a large number of objectively measured accelerometer data, and we will argue that it can be published as it is. We will argue that the article is unique, using both accelerometer data and parents estimation of their 4-6 year old children.
|
|
The title is intriguing as a question but long. Consider a title that shares the main findings of the research, namely parents are poor estimators of their preschool children’s duration of MV physical activity or parents engagement with children during PA does not result in more MVPA. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 2/13, lines 47/48: This sentence is confusing following the sentence about the child’s social environment created by parents (no reference to inheritance) and then suggests “Therefore, parents transfer inherited physical capital to their children.” Suggest removing the word “inherited” for revising the sentence for clarity.
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 2/13, line 77: define the term “free-living” |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 3/13, line 137: Questionnaire: Identify the constructs clearly to be measured with the questions that measured them in the survey ncluding the scale or other response form. If this study were to be replicated, it is not clear how the constructs were measured thus difficult to compare with findings of other studies, which is a general issue with the manuscript. |
We totally agree. The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Did the authors inquire about the biological relationship between child and parent? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
How many children of each gender participated? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
What was the SES status of the children’s families? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
What was the educational level of the parents? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Describe the physical living environment of the family (that is, is there space inside and outside to be active or are living spaces small; Is this an urban or rural area)? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
At what time during the year was the survey administered (i.e., does weather make a difference)? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Were all families from Norway or were some families international and thus bring their own cultural expectations for children’s appropriate behavior? For the international reader who does not know Norway as well as for the study itself, these are predictive variables. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
The authors suggest in the Discussion that the children come from a wide range of preschools. Consequently, could the type of preschool (i.e., curriculum) influence the children’s behavior during leisure time (most preschool teachers with PA in the curriculum certainly hope so). (In the Discussion (Strengths and Limitations, line 306), the authors suggest that data was collected in the preschools.) The PA literature is more mature now than even 5 years ago and a number of these variables are predictive of activity. By including them, the authors tease out their contributions in this sample and continue to study emerging differences (or lack thereof).
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 4/13, line 148: the authors include 122 cases that had missing data to compare to those with complete data (Table 2).Why? How did the authors account for the missing data statistically?
|
To include as many participants as possible in each of the statistical analyses, an independent t-test was conducted to examine differences in PA levels among children with children with all data (N=122) and children with some missing data according to mother or fathers participation/estimation (N=122). There were no significant differences between the two groups, and the drop was random |
|
The scatterplots were helpful to illustrated clearly the range of estimations by parents. |
We agree |
|
Page 8/13, line 250: Please clarify this portion of the sentence: “…and that socialization mechanisms may be more prominent later on.” Does this mean children pay more attention to parents as they mature? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 8/13, line 275: define the term “active travel.” Does this mean children walk or ride their bike to their destination? |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Page 9/13, line 306…The authors suggest that this is the first to study children’s PA in preschool and leisure in the same study (there are other studies in progress that do measure activity in home and preschool) however, the preschool data was not shared in this study. Including the data from preschool and teacher perceptions would recognize the ecological complexity of studying PA in children and this study. If this data is not included in this manuscript, I suggest removing this sentence. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Please add Implications for Research and for Practice. The conclusions drawn by the authors from the data and shared in the Discussion appear to be appropriate (e.g., concrete measures for parents to help judge physical activity (page 7/13, lines 22 and 23 and first full paragraph on page 8). Because this is not included in this study, discuss this suggestion as implication for further research. Of equal importance is understanding these results as evidence for practice (evidence-based or evidence informed practice) for parents, teachers, health professionals. Offer concrete suggestions of utilization of the results in practice.
|
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
|
Reviewer 2 |
|
|
I would only suggest adding a few clauses in the conclusion part connecting the findings and the related statements. |
The article is rewriting according to the reviewers comments |
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the revised manuscript. I appreciate that the authors addressed most of the comments. Numerous grammatical errors in the edits will need correction before publishing. Lines 121/122 What is normal for Norway? Rather than a subjective assessment, consider offering objective data such as temperature range, no precipitation (which is stated). Line 144 If no data was collected on the biological relationship between the parent and child, just state as such rather than guess. Lines 148-152 – Was the response format to the survey questions open ended (the parent gave an estimate) or intervals (for example 0 to 10%, 11 to 20%...) Line 163…What was the answer to the question as to whether or not the dropout was random? If researchers did not assess the randomness, then take part of the sentence out and leave it as a comparison only. Lines 266 – 270. Thank you for adding this language. I suggest, however, that just adding the word “early” “…and that early socialization mechanisms may be more…” provides clarification. The additional wording could be removed. Lines 344-352 Thank you for addressing the implications for professionals in practice. Again, grammar needs editing. The authors might consider wording such as: We suggest teachers and health professionals encourage parents to be physically active with their children by sharing information about the current and potential future health benefits of a physically active lifestyle. Early childhood teachers and public health authorities have a key role in health promotion and guidance for parents, for example, sharing information and guidance during conversations with parents in preschool and during health examinations. Such strategies will promote awareness of the health benefits of PA, regardless of socioeconomic status, and address health inequalities.Author Response
|
Reviewers comments |
Author response |
|
Numerous grammatical errors in the edits will need correction before publishing. |
The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
Lines 121/122 What is normal for Norway? Rather than a subjective assessment, consider offering objective data such as temperature range, no precipitation (which is stated). |
The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
Line 144 If no data was collected on the biological relationship between the parent and child, just state as such rather than guess. |
The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
Lines 148-152 – Was the response format to the survey questions open ended (the parent gave an estimate) or intervals (for example 0 to 10%, 11 to 20%...) |
The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
Line 163…What was the answer to the question as to whether or not the dropout was random? |
No question about this, but in the data set we could identify which children where both parents’ had reported their estimation level (122 children), and the group of children with missing data from the mother, the father, or both (122 children). The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
If researchers did not assess the randomness, then take part of the sentence out and leave it as a comparison only. |
We did assess the randomness using statistical analyses |
|
Lines 266 – 270. Thank you for adding this language. I suggest, however, that just adding the word “early” “…and that early socialization mechanisms may be more…” provides clarification. The additional wording could be removed. |
The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
|
Lines 344-352 Thank you for addressing the implications for professionals in practice. Again, grammar needs editing. The authors might consider wording such as: We suggest teachers and health professionals encourage parents to be physically active with their children by sharing information about the current and potential future health benefits of a physically active lifestyle. Early childhood teachers and public health authorities have a key role in health promotion and guidance for parents, for example, sharing information and guidance during conversations with parents in preschool and during health examinations. Such strategies will promote awareness of the health benefits of PA, regardless of socioeconomic status, and address health inequalities. |
Thank you. The article is rewritten according to the reviewers comments |
