Knee Function of Four Alpine and One Freestyle World Cup Skiers 30 Years after Serious Knee Injuries

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest?

Comments: Yes, the topic is relevant to the journal area of interest.

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

Comments: The abstract is comprehensive and includes essential components such as the objective, methods, results, and conclusion. It provides a clear overview of the study, including the background, the specific injuries studied, the treatment methods, and the long-term outcomes. The abstract also presents key findings, such as the skiers' ability to return to competition and the evaluation of their knee function using relevant scales. The conclusion summarizes the main outcomes and emphasizes the relationship between functional knee scores and the degree of activity.

The keywords are appropriate and relevant to the study, covering key aspects such as ACL rupture, KOOS, tegner activity scale, knee injuries, and alpine world cup. These keywords effectively highlight the main topics addressed in the research.

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

Comments: Yes, the goal of the study is explicitly stated in the introduction. The introduction clearly mentions that the purpose of the study is to report on the knee function of five Norwegian alpine world cup skiers 30 years after serious knee injuries. The formulation of the goal is clear and unambiguous, providing a concise overview of the main objective of the research.

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

Comments: Yes, the paper's structure appears to be coherent, and it aligns well with the goal stated in the introduction.

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

Comments: The discussion and conclusion are coherent with the results presented and contribute to a clear understanding of the study's implications.

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic?

Comments: The length of the paper seems appropriate for the depth of the study and the complexity of the topic.

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Yes, the writing style in the provided text is generally clear and understandable. The language used is formal and technical, which is appropriate for a scientific or research paper. The text follows a logical structure, moving from the introduction to the methods, results, and discussion, and finally, the conclusion.

The information is presented in a coherent manner, with clear connections between different sections of the paper.

Further comments on the paper

Comments:

The paper provides a thorough exploration of the long-term outcomes for five alpine world cup skiers after serious knee injuries, and it effectively achieves its goal.

1. The paper is generally well-organized, with a clear structure from introduction to conclusion.

2. The inclusion of detailed information about the specific injuries, surgical procedures, and postoperative complications provides a rich context for readers, enhancing the clinical relevance of the study.

3. The paper consistently maintains its focus on the main goal stated in the introduction, ensuring that the content aligns with the study's objective throughout.

In summary, the paper showcases a commendable effort in its exploration of the long-term consequences of serious knee injuries in alpine world cup skiers. The inclusion of clinical details, individual athlete stories, and the longitudinal perspective enriches the study's overall impact and contribution to the field of sports medicine.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - This manuscript is recommended for further publication.

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team