Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial

Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597" }, "headline": "Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college...", "datePublished": "2023-12-15T15:29:16", "dateModified": "2025-07-18T14:04:40", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Makrem Soudani" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Faical Farhat" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Amine Ghram" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Helmi Ben Saad" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Mehdi Chlif" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurological disorder that can affect motor skills and psychophysiological well-being. Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE) improves cognitive and physical outcomes in patients with CP. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effects of VRE on attention, vigor, and decision-making abilities in adolescents with CP. Methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of VRE compared to TE conducted in a controlled laboratory environment. Results Fourteen participants (42.9 % female) were included in this analysis. The results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions The findings suggest that VRE is an effective intervention for improving attention and vigor in adolescents with CP. Registration Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR202308598603482; 31/08/2023). The trial was reported in accordance with the CONSORT reporting guidelines. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3", "name": "Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological..." } } ] } Home Browse Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Soudani M, Farhat F, Ghram A et al. Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Clinical trial Revised Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] Makrem Soudani 1 , Faical Farhat 1 , Amine Ghram https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2851-0753 2 , Helmi Ben Saad https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7477-2965 3 , Mehdi Chlif 4 Makrem Soudani 1 , Faical Farhat 1 , [...] Amine Ghram https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2851-0753 2 , Helmi Ben Saad https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7477-2965 3 , Mehdi Chlif 4 PUBLISHED 18 Jul 2025 Author details Author details 1 Research Laboratory Education, Motricity, Sport and Health LR19JS01, University of Sfax, Sfax, Sfax, 3000, Tunisia 2 Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Doha, 3050, Qatar 3 Research laboratory “Heart failure, LR12SP09”, Farhat HACHED Hospital,, University of Sousse, Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia 4 Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, University of Picardy Jules Verne, Amiens, Hauts-de-France, France Makrem Soudani Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Faical Farhat Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Amine Ghram Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Helmi Ben Saad Roles: Formal Analysis, Writing – Review & Editing Mehdi Chlif Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the All trials matter collection. Abstract Background Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurological disorder that can affect motor skills and psychophysiological well-being. Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE) improves cognitive and physical outcomes in patients with CP. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effects of VRE on attention, vigor, and decision-making abilities in adolescents with CP. Methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of VRE compared to TE conducted in a controlled laboratory environment. Results Fourteen participants (42.9 % female) were included in this analysis. The results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions The findings suggest that VRE is an effective intervention for improving attention and vigor in adolescents with CP. Registration Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR202308598603482; 31/08/2023). The trial was reported in accordance with the CONSORT reporting guidelines. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Cognitive Function; Decision-Making; Health; RCT; Training; Virtual Reality Corresponding Author(s) Amine Ghram ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Amine Ghram Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: This study was supported by the Qatar National Library. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 Soudani M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Soudani M, Farhat F, Ghram A et al. Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.3 ) First published: 15 Dec 2023, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.1 ) Latest published: 18 Jul 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.3 ) Revised Amendments from Version 2 This revised version significantly improves upon the previous manuscript by incorporating detailed feedback from peer reviewers. Key enhancements include clearer articulation of the study rationale and novelty, particularly the use of immersive virtual reality exercise (VRE) in adolescents with cerebral palsy. The introduction now better contextualizes the relevance of VRE by citing current literature and clarifying the study population and design. The Methods section has been updated to include appropriate references supporting game selection, rehabilitation strategies, and the use of the VirZoom system. Results have been thoroughly revised for accuracy and clarity. Statistical reporting now clearly differentiates between significant and non-significant findings, includes missing means and standard deviations, and adheres to standard APA reporting conventions. Terminology inconsistencies have been corrected across sections, and grammatical revisions improve overall readability. In the Discussion, overgeneralizations and speculative interpretations have been removed or appropriately qualified. Interpretations of results are now better aligned with the actual data. The limitations section has been rewritten to adopt a more objective tone, and recommendations for future research have been adjusted to remain within the scope of the study. Together, these revisions improve the scientific rigor, clarity, and transparency of the article, strengthening its value for researchers and clinicians interested in VR-based rehabilitation for youth with cerebral palsy. This revised version significantly improves upon the previous manuscript by incorporating detailed feedback from peer reviewers. Key enhancements include clearer articulation of the study rationale and novelty, particularly the use of immersive virtual reality exercise (VRE) in adolescents with cerebral palsy. The introduction now better contextualizes the relevance of VRE by citing current literature and clarifying the study population and design. The Methods section has been updated to include appropriate references supporting game selection, rehabilitation strategies, and the use of the VirZoom system. Results have been thoroughly revised for accuracy and clarity. Statistical reporting now clearly differentiates between significant and non-significant findings, includes missing means and standard deviations, and adheres to standard APA reporting conventions. Terminology inconsistencies have been corrected across sections, and grammatical revisions improve overall readability. In the Discussion, overgeneralizations and speculative interpretations have been removed or appropriately qualified. Interpretations of results are now better aligned with the actual data. The limitations section has been rewritten to adopt a more objective tone, and recommendations for future research have been adjusted to remain within the scope of the study. Together, these revisions improve the scientific rigor, clarity, and transparency of the article, strengthening its value for researchers and clinicians interested in VR-based rehabilitation for youth with cerebral palsy. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Hsiu-Ching Chiu See the authors' detailed response to the review by Qamar Mahmood READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction Cerebral palsy (CP) is a complex neurological disorder characterized by nonprogressive brain changes during fetal or infant development that lead to movement and posture abnormalities. 1 Beyond motor impairments, individuals with CP often experience a range of associated symptoms, including sensory, cognitive, communicative, perceptual, behavioral, and seizure abnormalities. 2 These challenges contribute to an increased risk of metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, reduced cardiorespiratory endurance, and diminished muscle strength. 3 Physical activity (PA) plays a crucial role in managing CP and improving overall health outcomes. However, individuals with CP tend to engage in lower levels of PA than their peers, 4 potentially exacerbating negative health outcomes and increasing the risk of premature mortality. 5 , 6 As the most prevalent cause of physical impairment, CP significantly influences the quality of life and poses substantial economic and psychological burdens. 7 Recent advancements in technology, particularly virtual reality (VR), have demonstrated promise in promoting PA and enhancing the overall well-being of various populations. VR applications have been developed and utilized in rehabilitative and behavioral medicine, 8 , 9 with commercially available VR exercise (VRE) equipment demonstrating potential as an efficacious and motivating tool for PA participation. 10 The novelty of this study lies in its investigation of the acute effects of VRE, a concept that is particularly significant given the existing gaps in understanding the differences between acute and chronic exercise effects in the CP population. Acute bouts of exercise may yield immediate benefits in cognitive function, mood, and spasticity, offering a complementary approach to chronic exercise interventions which are typically emphasized in rehabilitation. Understanding these acute effects could inform clinical practices by providing insights into how short-term exposure to engaging VR environments might enhance motivation and adherence to exercise regimens among individuals with CP. Moreover, this research could guide the development of VR technologies tailored to the specific needs of this population, improving overall rehabilitation practices. 9 Despite extensive research on the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive function and memory, 11 a notable gap remains in the understanding of the effects of acute or single bouts of exercise, particularly in children and adolescents with CP. Limited studies have explored how VRE can motivate and enhance engagement in PA for these individuals in comparison to traditional exercise modalities. It is crucial to accurately categorize conditions: traditional exercise (TE) should refer explicitly to classic exercise modalities without VR enhancements, whereas our intervention, which incorporates a VR component through the use of the VirZoom system, represents a novel integration of technology into physical activity routines. 10 This study aimed to address this knowledge gap by investigating the physiological and psychological effects of utilizing VRE cycles compared with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. The choice of this demographic is motivated by the unique challenges they face during the transition to adulthood, including increased independence and the need for cognitive and psychological support. This age group is particularly underrepresented in CP research, and their experiences warrant further exploration. The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affect, memory, and decision making in adolescents with CP. Additionally, this study explored the effects of VRE on spasticity, a crucial secondary outcome that significantly affects the quality of life of individuals with CP. By focusing on an underrepresented adolescent group and utilizing novel VR technology, this research seeks to provide valuable insights into the potential benefits of VR applications in enhancing cognitive and psychological aspects compared to conventional exercise approaches. Methods Study design This study was a subgroup analysis of the ongoing RCT registered with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (identification number: PACTR202308598603482) on August 31, 2023. The RCT was conducted following the guidelines established by the CONSORT statement. 12 Testing occurred between June and August 2023 at Sfax Association for the Care of the Physically Handicapped (Sfax, Tunisia). All procedures in the study adhered to the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee as well as the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical standards. 13 The study received approval from the University Institutional Review Board and the local ethics committee of the High Institute of Nursing, University of Sfax, Tunisia (Protection Committee Approval in 25 January 2022 Registration code: CPP SUD N 0388/2022). Before commencing the study, adolescents aged 14 to 16 years and their parents or guardians, received an explanation of the test protocol. Game Selection and Rationale Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increasing PA and improving health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system was grounded in several rationales backed by literature. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of PA that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, thus addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research has indicated that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation (e.g., 15). Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem-solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants. Lastly, we aimed to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention. 14 Participants A convenience sample of college students were recruited from the aforementioned association. To select participants, the study’s inclusion criteria were disclosed to physicians, pediatric physiotherapy clinics, special educators, speech therapists, sociologists from the above-cited association, and ambulant care services. Potential participants were approached by association staff and social workers. These professionals recruited them to participate in the study. The eligibility criteria for participant selection were as follows: i) adolescent aged between 14 and 16 years, ii) medical diagnosis of spastic CP confirmed by a pediatric neurologist; iii) motor function classified at level I or II according to the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS V), iv) PA levels below the international norm (i.e., less than one hour daily at >5 metabolic equivalents (MET)), indicating moderate or vigorous intensity, 15 v) lack of regular sports participation (i.e., less than three sessions per week for 20 minutes or more), and vi) reported issues with mobility in daily life or sports. Non-inclusion criteria for participation in the study were: i) engaging in a week of moderate to intense exercise exceeding 150 minutes per week; ii) GMFCS level III to V, iii) behavioral issues that prevent participation in group activities or a movement disorder primarily dyskinetic or atactic in nature, iv) recent surgery within the previous six months, v) botulinum toxin treatment, and vi) Serial casting within the recent three months or scheduled procedures during the intervention period. Patients’ level of physical ability was categorized using the GMFCS V. 16 GMFCS level I or II indicate independent walking for more than 12 months and the ability to ambulate for at least 10 m with or without a gait-assistance device (walker or crutches). GMFCS level III to V precludes the use of the Oculus Quest handheld controller, moderate to severe intellectual disability, uncontrollable seizures, or conditions that make physical training dangerous (e.g., hip dysplasia, cardiac arrhythmia, or mitochondrial defects). Randomization Simple random allocation was used to generate a random allocation sequence. This means that each participant had an equal chance of being assigned to either the VRE or TE group. No restriction, such as blocking and block size, was applied in this study. This means that participants were not blocked or stratified. The mechanism used to implement the random allocation sequence (such as sequentially numbered containers) described any steps taken to conceal the sequence until interventions were assigned and sequentially numbered envelopes were used to implement the random allocation sequence. The envelopes were sealed until the intervention was completed. The allocation sequence was generated by the researcher ( MS on the list of authors). The latter also enrolled participants and assigned them to interventions. Experimental design The study protocol is illustrated in Figure 1 . Figure 1. Flowchart of the study protocol. TE: Traditional exercise. VRE: Virtual reality exercise. Anthropometric measurements, including height, weight, and body mass index (BMI), were recorded for the participants wearing light clothing and no shoes. The participents underwent two 40-minute cycling sessions 17 on two distinct days. A two-day interval separated the sessions, and they were conducted in a counterbalanced manner: (1) a VirZoom VRE bike and (2) a TE bike. Both bikes are Everfit BFK-500 Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Each session consisted of three conditions. The first was a five-minute period in which the participant lay down. This was followed by a 30-minute cycling period. The third condition was another period lying down for the remaining time. The Go-No-Go task 9 and the Profile Of Mood States scale (POMS) 14 were administered two days prior to each session as well as immediately afterwards. Heart rate (bpm), blood pressure (mmHg), Modified Ashworth Scale, 18 and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) 19 scores were recorded immediately before and after each session. Body composition Height was measured with a Harpenden 602VR stadiometer to the last complete 0.1 cm, and body composition was estimated using a multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analyzer (TBF-410GS, Tanita Co., Tokyo, Japan). This is a method validated against reference methods. 20 The parameters collected in this study included weight, Body Mass Index, fat mass, and fat free mass. VirZoom VRE VirZoom’s VZfit offers a unique experience by combining a controller attached to handlebars and a sensor on the bike crank. When used in conjunction with an Oculus Go virtual reality headset, it allows researchers to explore various virtual destinations while the participant is stationary on a bike. 21 During the study, participants played two 30-minute exercise sessions on the VirZoom VZfit, which features a variety of mini-games. The games chosen for the study were “Le Tour” and “Race Car,” both of which require players to pedal faster or slower to speed up or slow down, and to lean their body side to side to turn left or right. These games were observed to be the most intense and were played with a pedal resistance set at a medium level. All participants were asked to maintain a moderate level of exertion, with their heart rate ranging between 65% to 85% of their Age-predicted Maximal Heart Rate (ApMHR) 22 as measured by a polar sensor monitor. Traditional stationary exercise bike To create a training environment similar to traditional cycling and to reduce the environmental impact, participants watched a virtual cycling video on television while using the Sparnod fitness sub-52 stationary bike. VR cycling sessions were designed to achieve an exercise intensity equivalent to 65% to 85% of the ApMHR. 22 To ensure uniform exercise intensity between the traditional and VR cycling sessions, participants were instructed to maintain their heart rate between 65% and 85% of their ApMHR, which was measured by the integrated heart rate monitor on the stationary bike during the traditional cycling session. The Go/No-Go task The Go/No-Go task is a response inhibition task in which a motor response must be executed or inhibited. 23 During this task using the Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) computer software, participants button on a keyboard. 24 The presentation began with a 2 × 2 array with four stars (one in each square of the array). A single letter (P or R) was then presented in one of the squares for a duration of 500 milliseconds with an inter-stimulus interval of 1,500 milliseconds. In the first condition (P-Go), participants were asked to press a button in response to the target letter P and withhold their response to the non-target letter R. The ratio of targets to non-targets was 80:20. The first condition consisted of 160 trials. A second, reversal condition (R-Go) was then administered, and participants were now asked to make a response to the target letter R and withhold their response to the non-target letter P (the letter that they were initially conditioned to make a motor response to the task, while NoGo errors and RT to Go responses are considered as indicators of impulsivity. 23 The Go/No-Go task is a computerized test that evaluates inhibitory control, a crucial component of cognitive assessment and self-regulation. 25 During the task, participants respond by pressing a button when certain visual stimuli appear (Go trials) and withhold their response to other stimuli (No-Go trials), measuring their response inhibition. However, response inhibition can be difficult if No-Go trials are relatively rare, as Go responses become prepotent, meaning the system is biased to produce them. To ensure that inhibitory control is necessary, No-Go trials should make up less than 20% of the trials and each trial’s duration should be shorter than 1,500 ms. 26 To interpret data from the Go/No-Go task, precision and reaction time are measured, performance is compared with established norms, and errors of commission and omission are analyzed. Examining these factors provides insight into the participant’s response inhibition and determines whether their performance falls within the expected range. 26 The Montreal Cognitive Assessment The MoCA is a cognitive screening tool designed to detect Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) in the early stages of various neurodegenerative disorders. 27 It is a 10-minute test that is more sensitive than other commonly used screening tools, such as the Mini-Mental State Examination, making it a reliable and valid tool for detecting MCI in clinical settings. 28 The MoCA is composed of 30 questions that assess various cognitive domains, including orientation, executive functioning, memory, language, and visuospatial abilities. 19 We used for this study the Arabic version. The tasks in the MoCA include naming objects, memorizing a short list of words, drawing a clock face, and performing serial subtraction tasks. Scores on the MoCA range from 0 to 30, with a cut-off point of 26, where a score of 26 or higher is generally considered normal. 19 The Profile of Mood State Mood can be measured using a valid, reliable, and sensitive self-report questionnaire called the POMS, 29 which consists of 58 items (i.e., words or sentences) and can provide valuable information about adolescents’ emotional states. 30 We used the POMS Arabic version of the POMS. 31 The POMS is a self-report assessment tool that measures six dimensions of mood: Tension-anxiety, anger-hostility, vigor-activity, fatigue-inertia, depression-dejection and confusion-bewilderment. The POMS is a 65-item questionnaire that is scored on a 5-point scale (0 = not at all to 4 = extremely). 32 It takes about 10-15 minutes to complete. The Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) The PACES is a reliable, valid and sensitive measure of PA enjoyment across populations. 33 , 34 The Arabic version of the PACES, which has been reported to be a reliable and valid measure of enjoyment of PA in Arabic-speaking populations, was applied. 35 The PACES consists of 18 items that are rated on a 7-point Likert scale, from 1 (I don’t enjoy it at all) to 7 (I enjoy it very much). The total score of the PACES ranges from 18 to 126, with higher scores indicating greater enjoyment of PA. The Modified Ashworth Scale The MAS assesses spasticity by measuring resistance to passive joint movement in patients with neurological disorders. 18 The scale assigns scores from 0 to 5 based on the degree of increased muscle tone, ranging from no increase (0) to severe increase (4). To conduct the assessment, participants are placed in a supine position, and for muscles primarily involved in flexion, the joint is moved from maximal flexion to maximal extension over one second, while muscles primarily involved in extension are moved from maximal extension to maximal flexion over one second. The investigator records the level of resistance encountered during the movement to determine the corresponding score: 0 for no resistance, 1 for minimal resistance at the end range, 1+ for a catch followed by less resistance over half the range, 2 for rigidity over more than half the range, and 3 for considerable resistance over most of the range. In this study, we have utilized the 0 to 5 version of the MAS 36 to measure spasticity. The latter version enables numerical quantification of spasticity severity. During the assessment, the participants were placed in a supine position, and the investigators slowly flexed and extended each joint over one second, recording the amount of resistance encountered on the scale from 0 to 5. Sample size and statistical analysis A priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power3 37 with the alpha level set at 0.05 and a power of 0.80, which concluded that the sample size to find significance should be 14 participants. Values were presented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Cohen’s effect sizes (d) were classified as small (0.20), moderate (0.50), and large (0.80). 38 A 2 × 2 repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (TE vs. VRE) and time (pre- vs. post- exercise) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to the analysis, Mauchly’s test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly’s test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. 39 The main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post-hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including the means and SDs for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. Results Among the initial 20 participants, only 14 (seven in each group) were included in the final sample (7 in each group) ( Figure 2 ). Figure 2. CONSORT flowchart of the recruitment process for participants in the trial. n: number. TE: Traditional exercise. VRE: Virtual reality exercise Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants. Characteristic TE group (n=7) VRE group (n=7) Total population (n=14) Age (months) 185.2 ± 9.4 188.5 ± 8.1 186.8 ± 8.8 Sex (Boys) 4 (57.1%) 3 (42.9%) 7 (50.0%) Height (cm) 145.3 ± 12.5 147.8 ± 10.2 146.6 ± 11.4 Weight (kg) 45.2 ± 8.1 46.7 ± 9.4 45.9 ± 8.7 Body mass index (kg/m 2 ) 21.2 ± 3.5 20.9 ± 2.7 21.1 ± 3.1 Table 2 shows the comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions. Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Data TE group (n=7) VRE group (n=7) ANOVA Pre-training Post-training Pre-training Attention 1.93 ± 0.62 3.64 ± 1.15 1.93 ± 0.62 Memory 2.36 ± 0.93 4.14 ± 0.66 2.36 ± 0.93 Total Score 19.29 ± 2.34 23.07 ± 2.84 19.29 ± 2.34 Attention There was a significant main effect of exercise type on attention ( F (1,13) = 6.30, p = 0.026, ηp 2 = 0.327). Participants’ mean response attention was higher in VRE (SD = 1.25137) compared to TE (SD = 1.15073). This difference was a significant main effect of time F (1.13) = 97.066, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.882). Participants’ mean response attention was higher at post-training (SD = 0.615) compared to pre-training (SD = 1.251). There was a statistically significant interaction between exercise type and time ( F (1.13) = 6.30, p = 0.026, ηp 2 = 0.327). Memory The analysis indicated a non-significant main effect of exercise type on memory ( F (1,13) = 3.059, p = 0.104, ηp 2 = 0.190); however, participants’ mean response memory in the TE group (4.14 ± 0.66) was observed to be higher than in the VRE group (3.86 ± 0.86). The main effect of time was significant ( F (1,13) = 180.974, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.933), suggesting a considerable impact of time on participants’ memory scores. Total score There was a significant main effect of exercise type on the participants’ total scores ( F (1.13) = 19.118, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.595). Participants’ mean response total score were higher for VRE (SD = 2.547) than for TE (SD = 2.841). This difference was a significant main effect of time F (1.13) = 80.686, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.861). Descriptive statistics revealed that participants’ mean response attention was higher post-training (SD = 2.547) than pre-training (SD = 2.334). There was a statistically significant interaction between exercise type and time F (1.13) = 19.118, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.595). Vigor The results for vigor indicated no significant effect of exercise type ( F (1,13) = 2.576, p = 0.133, ηp 2 = 0.165), with attention to the absence of mean values obscuring the interpretation of results. Nonetheless, participants reported a higher average vigor post-training regardless of the type of exercise. Decision-making correct There was a significant main effect of exercise type on participants’ decision-making ( F (1,13) = 26.338, p = 0.01, ηp 2 = 0.670). Participants’ mean decision-making scores were higher in the VRE condition compared to the TE condition, although means are required for a complete interpretation. Decision-making errors Analysis indicated a significant main effect on decision-making errors ( F (1,13) = 28.202, p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.684), with errors being fewer in the VRE condition compared to the TE condition. The main effect of time ( F (1,13) = 5.350, p = 0.038, ηp 2 = 0.292) suggested participants made fewer decision-making errors post-training. MAS Table 3 shows a comparison of pre- and post- training scores for spasticity in both the TE and VRE training conditions. Both TE and VRE interventions effectively reduced spasticity levels in various lower body regions. Notably, the VRE group exhibited more substantial improvements, with a 5.61 reduction in spasticity for the lower body (ankle and knee) than the TE group (3.28). In the ankle region, VRE resulted in a significant 2.29 reduction in spasticity, whereas TE reduced spasticity by 1.43. Table 3. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for spasticity in both the traditional exercise (TE) and virtual reality exercise (VRE) training conditions (n=14). TE group (n=7) VRE group (n=7) ES p Pre-training Post-training Δ [95%CI] Δ (%) Pre-training Post-training Δ [95%CI] Δ (%) Lower body (Ankle + Knee) 19.57+7.74 16.29+6.05 -3.28 [2.87, 3.69] -16.74% 18.36+7 14.14+5.68 -5.61 [5.61, 4.11] -25.79% 1.43 0.32 Ankle 8.79±2.74 6.5±1.95 -2.29 [1.59, 2.99] −26.01% 7.14±2.39 5.71±2.08 -1.43 [1.37, 1.49] 20.00% 1.86 0.45 Knee 12.00±1.23 8.07±3.44 -5.74 [-13.33, 1.62] −32.75% 11.21±5.29 7.86±3.88 -3.85 [2.73, 4.97] -29.87% 4.79 021 Discussion Our RCT demonstrated that VRE had a significant positive impact on attention, as indicated by higher scores for increasing patient vigor than TE did. Furthermore, VRE yielded slightly higher scores in increasing participants’ vigor than TE did. In terms of decision-making, a significant main effect of exercise type was observed, with VRE leading to higher scores than TE. However, it is worth noting that TE resulted in higher memory scores than VRE. Our results showed VRE immediately following PA might have a more favorable impact on attention than TE. This finding is in line with prior research demonstrating the ability of VR to enhance cognitive function, particularly attention, and cognitive training to improve daily activities. 40 Additionally, this aligns with Neumann et al . 41 who discovered that VR may not always be the optimal approach for diverting attention from exercise-related cues, thus emphasizing the importance of attentional mechanisms in shaping emotional and motivational responses to exercise in a VR environment. By directing attention towards the virtual environment, VR systems can increase the likelihood of positive impact and satisfaction, underscoring the crucial role of attentional mechanisms in shaping emotional and motivational responses during VRE. According to a 2020 research, VR environments can be customized to simulate real-life situations that require specific cognitive abilities, such as memory, decision-making, and problem-solving. 40 The present study investigated the acute effects of VRE on memory and compared them with those of TE alone. The current findings revealed a significant difference in memory scores between pre- and post-training, suggesting that time had a considerable impact on participants’ memory. Interestingly, memory scores varied significantly between the TE and VRE conditions, with participants’ mean response memory being higher for TE than for VRE. However, the interaction between exercise type and time was not significant, indicating that the impact of exercise type on memory did not depend on whether the memory was measured before or after the exercise. The results differ from previous research on memory in elderly stroke survivors, which suggests that training environments can be customized to improve cognitive abilities, including memory, that influence daily activities. 40 Additionally, the results highlight the potential benefits of immersive VR in facilitating the transfer of learned abilities from the virtual world to the real world. While some studies suggest that VRE may not be as effective as TE in enhancing memory, others have identified that VRE can be helpful in reducing memory decline in older adults. 42 Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and identify the potential advantages of exercise for memory enhancement. Therefore, the potential benefits of VRE in memory enhancement warrant further investigation. Evidence suggests that there is a link between attention, memory, and vigor immediately after exercise. We reported a significant main effect of exercise type on vigor, with participants reporting higher levels of vigor after VRE than after TE. Moreover, there was a significant main effect of time on participants’ vigor, with higher levels of vigor reported after exercise than before. However, there was no significant interaction between exercise type and time on participants’ vigor. Our findings are consistent with previous research indicating that acute exercise can enhance feelings of vigor in the short term. 13 However, our results did not align with the findings of Adhyaru et al ., 43 who reported no significant difference in vigor between VRE and TE. The present study identified a significant main effect of exercise type on participants’ decision-making, with higher scores observed in VRE than TE, suggesting that VRE may enhance decision-making abilities. However, no significant main effect of time on decision-making scores was found, indicating that the effect of exercise on decision-making did not differ significantly between pre- and post- exercise measures. Our finding diverges from previous studies that reported improvements in decision-making following acute exercise, such as Ulas et al . 44 who found a single bout of moderate-intensity exercise improved decision-making performance in healthy adults. Our results are consistent with those of Shaw et al ., 45 who reported that the use of a competitive virtual trainer while riding at a moderate-vigorous intensity did not improve cognitive performance. Conversely, our findings align with those of Ertoy Karagol et al . 46 who reported that VRE led to a significant improvement in vigor compared to the control group, as well as a significant increase in PA compared to the control group. These results suggest that VRE may be an effective intervention for improving vigor and PA in adolescents. Furthermore, the interaction effect between exercise type and time indicated that the style of exercise and the measurement time had different effects on decision-making abilities. Thus, further investigation, such as post-hoc tests, is necessary to identify conditions that vary significantly from one another. This study identified significant differences in decision-making errors based on exercise type and time, indicating both have an impact. Participants made more errors during TE than during VRE, suggesting that VR provides greater cognitive benefits for decision-making. Moreover, participants made fewer errors post-training, indicating that exercise reduced decision-making errors overall. The significant interaction between exercise type and time demonstrated the effect of exercise on errors differed pre- and post-exercise. The benefits of VRE on errors seemed more pronounced post-training, while benefits of TE were less evident. Overall, these findings suggest that VRE may be more beneficial than TE for improving decision-making accuracy and that the effects of exercise on decision-making may vary depending on the type of exercise and timing of assessment. Our findings that VRE may be more advantageous than normal exercise for enhancing decision-making accuracy is supported previous study. 47 Mestre et al . 47 compared indoor cycling exercise with VR feedback vs. non-VR feedback and highlighted that cycling exercise with VR feedback had a reduced perceived exertion and an increased level of enjoyment of PA. This finding unequivocally demonstrates the beneficial effects of VR feedback and a virtual coach on the enjoyment of PA, with the virtual coach showing the greatest gains. 47 Our results indicate that VRE with bike has the potential to acutely reduce muscle spasticity. VRE with bike provide visual and auditory stimulation in addition to cycling, which may distract users and draw attention away from muscle sensations. 17 This reduction in sensory input could decrease muscle spasms and contractions, resulting in temporary relief from spasticity. 43 The immediate effects observed after using the VRE bike 17 suggested an acute impact on spasticity. However, longer-term investigations are needed to determine whether regular use of VRE with bike can yield sustained benefits for reducing spasticity. 17 These results emphasize the potential advantages of incorporating VRE as a promising intervention, with larger effect sizes, to enhance the physical well-being and motor skills of individuals with CP. Limitations Some limitations must be considered. The major one was the retrospective registration of our RCT. Since the primary purpose of trial registration is to enhance transparency, reduce bias, and promote the integrity of clinical research, retrospective registration of an RCT can pose some challenges and may be viewed with skepticism by journal editors, peer reviewers, and readers. Retrospective registration of an RCT can raise concerns about selective reporting, outcome switching, and potential bias. However, we have registered our RCT in the aim to be transparent about the timeline of the study. Registration was performed immediately as possible just before the trial ended. We included the full study protocol with detailed information on the study design, primary and secondary outcomes, and statistical analysis plan. This demonstrate that our study was conducted in a rigorous and pre-planned manner. We confirm that the present study adhered to ethical guidelines and that the retrospective registration does not compromise the ethical conduct of the trial. We explicitly discuss how we have mitigated the risk of bias in our study by addressing concerns related to selective outcome reporting and data-driven decisions. We attest that there were no modifications to the study design or analysis plan after the data collection. Second, the study’s short duration precludes conclusions about prolonged effects. Third, the “small” but calculated sample size may limit generalizability of the results. Finally, potential confounding factors such as participant exercise history and spasticity severity were not considered. Despite these limitations, the present study has enhanced our understanding of the relationship between TEs and VREs in adolescents with CP. We believe that our findings will stimulate further investigations in this important area. Implications and futures directions For adolescents with CP, VRE bike games using VirZoom’s VZfit appear to be an effective alternative to boost adherence and, consequently, enhance mood. Future studies should be conducted in this regard to investigate additional topics related to VRE bike games for children, including assessing those with CP using objective measures to determine how long the virtual headset workouts last, assessing the interactions between individual and group activities, and determining the long-term effects of the activities performed both in the lab and at home. Conclusions VRE can help improve attention, vigor, and decision-making in college students with CP more than TE. However, TE may be more beneficial in enhancing memory scores. Future research with larger samples sizes is needed to validate our findings and identify the mechanisms driving differences in cognitive outcomes between VR and TE. Overall, both types of exercise showed potential for improving mental performance and well-being. Data availability Underlying data Zenodo: Data of 14 participants in the RCT titled Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psycho-physiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy [Dataset]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13952330 . 48 The project contained an Excel file that included the numerical data of the 14 participants. Reporting guidelines CONSORT checklist for: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psycho-physiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10157607 . 49 Data are available under the term Creative Commons Zero (CC0). Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the adolescents and their parents for their support. References 1. Rosenbaum P, Paneth N, Leviton A, et al. : A report: the definition and classification of cerebral palsy April 2006. Dev Med Child Neurol Suppl. 2007; 109 :8–14. PubMed Abstract 2. Bax M, Goldstein M, Rosenbaum P, et al. : Proposed definition and classification of cerebral palsy, April 2005. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005; 47 (8):571–576. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 3. de Groot S , Dallmeijer AJ, Bessems PJC, et al. : Comparison of muscle strength, sprint power and aerobic capacity in adults with and without cerebral palsy. J Rehabil Med. 2012; 44 (11):932–938. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 4. Carlon S, Taylor NF, Dodd KJ, et al. : Differences in habitual physical activity levels of young people with cerebral palsy and their typically developing peers: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2013; 35 :647–655. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 5. Nooijen C, Slaman J, van der Slot W , et al. : Health-related physical fitness of ambulatory adolescents and young adults with spastic cerebral palsy. J Rehabil Med. 2014; 46 (7):642–647. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 6. Whitney DG, Schmidt M, Haapala H, et al. : Timecourse of morbidity onset among adults living with cerebral palsy. Am J Prev Med. 2021 Jul; 61 (1):37–43. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 7. Makris T, Dorstyn D, Crettenden A: Quality of life in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Disabil Rehabil. 2021; 43 (3):299–308. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 8. McEwen D, Taillon-Hobson A, Bilodeau M, et al. : Virtual reality exercise improves mobility after stroke: an inpatient randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2014; 45 (6):1853–1855. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 9. Zeng N, Liu W, Pope ZC, et al. : Acute effects of virtual reality exercise biking on college students’ physical responses. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2022; 93 (3):633–639. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 10. Ludyga S, Gerber M, Puhse U, et al. : Systematic review and meta-analysis investigating moderators of long-term effects of exercise on cognition in healthy individuals. Nat Hum Behav. 2020; 4 (6):603–612. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 11. Basso JC, Suzuki WA: The effects of acute exercise on mood, cognition, neurophysiology, and neurochemical pathways: A review. Brain Plast. 2017; 2 (2):127–152. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 12. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. : CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010; 340 : c332. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 13. Htut TZC, Hiengkaew V, Jalayondeja C, et al. : Effects of physical, virtual reality-based, and brain exercise on physical, cognition, and preference in older persons: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2018; 15 (1):10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 14. Renger R: A review of the profile of mood states (POMS) in the prediction of athletic success. J Appl Sport Psychol. 1993; 5 (1):78–84. Publisher Full Text 15. Strong WB, Malina RM, Blimkie CJ, et al. : Evidence based physical activity for school-age youth. J Pediatr. 2005; 146 (6):732–737. Publisher Full Text 16. Almasri NA, Saleh M, Abu-Dahab S, et al. : Functional profiles of children with cerebral palsy in Jordan based on the association between gross motor function and manual ability. BMC Pediatr. 2018; 18 (1):276. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 17. Zeng N, Pope Z, Gao Z: Acute effect of virtual reality exercise bike games on college student s’ physiological and psychological outcomes. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2017 Jul; 20 (7):453–457. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Bohannon RW, Smith MB: Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987; 67 (2):206–207. Publisher Full Text 19. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bedirian V, et al. : The Montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005; 53 (4):695–699. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 20. Bosy-Westphal A, Later W, Hitze B, et al. : Accuracy of bioelectrical impedance consumer devices for measurement of body composition in comparison to whole body magnetic resonance imaging and dual X-ray absorptiometry. Obes Facts. 2008; 1 (6):319–324. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 21. Hallett V: Tired of biking in the gym? Virtual reality lets you cycle in Iceland, instead.Washingtonpostcom.2020 2020/02/21/. 22. Pinkstaff S, Peberdy MA, Kontos MC, et al. : Quantifying exertion level during exercise stress testing using percentage of age-predicted maximal heart rate, rate pressure product, and perceived exertion. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010; 85 (12):1095–1100. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 23. Barkley RA: The ecological validity of laboratory and analogue assessment methods of ADHD symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1991; 19 (2):149–178. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 24. Mueller ST, Piper BJ: The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL test battery. J Neurosci Methods. 2014 Jan 30; 222 :250–259. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 25. Donders FC: On the speed of mental processes. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1969; 30 :412–431. Publisher Full Text 26. Wessel JR: Prepotent motor activity and inhibitory control demands in different variants of the go/no-go paradigm. Psychophysiology. 2018; 55 (3). PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 27. Dagenais E, Rouleau I, Demers M, et al. : Value of the MoCA test as a screening instrument in multiple sclerosis. Can J Neurol Sci. 2013; 40 (3):410–415. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 28. Smith T, Gildeh N, Holmes C: The Montreal cognitive assessment: validity and utility in a memory clinic setting. Can J Psychiatry. 2007; 52 (5):329–332. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 29. Terry PC, Lane AM, Lane HJ, et al. : Development and validation of a mood measure for adolescents. J Sports Sci. 1999 Nov; 17 (11):861–872. Publisher Full Text 30. McNair D, Lorr M, Droppleman L: POMS manual—Profile of mood questionnaire. San Diego: Edits; 1992. 31. Aroian KJ, Kulwicki A, Kaskiri EA, et al. : Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic language version of the Profile of Mood States. Res Nurs Health. 2007 Oct; 30 (5):531–541. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 32. McNair D, Lorr M, Droppleman LJCE, et al. : Profile of mood states. San Diego; 1971. 33. Dunton GF, Tscherne J, Rodriguez D: Factorial validity and gender invariance of the physical activity enjoyment scale (PACES) in older adolescents. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2009; 80 (1):117–121. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 34. Moore JB, Yin Z, Hanes JC, et al. : Measuring enjoyment of physical activity in children: Validation of the physical activity enjoyment scale. J Appl Sport Psychol. 2009 Jan 1; 21 (S1):S116–S129. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 35. Alshboul S, Al-Smadi A, Al-Ansari H: Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES). J Sports Sci Med. 2013; 12 (3):425–430. 36. Neyroud D, Armand S, De Coulon G, et al. : Plantar flexor muscle weakness and fatigue in spastic cerebral palsy patients. Res Dev Disabil. 2017; 61 :66–76. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 37. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, et al. : G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39 (2):175–191. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 38. Lakens D: Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013; 4 :863. Publisher Full Text 39. Ng NYH, Jiang G, Cheung LP, et al. : Progression of glucose intolerance and cardiometabolic risk factors over a decade in Chinese women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A case-control study. PLoS Med. 2019; 16 (10): e1002953. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 40. Bauer ACM, Andringa G: The potential of immersive virtual reality for cognitive training in elderly. Gerontology. 2020; 66 (6):614–623. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 41. Neumann DL, Moffitt RL: Affective and attentional states when running in a virtual reality environment.Sports (Basel, Switzerland).2018; 6 (3). Publisher Full Text 42. Ng NYH, Jiang G, Cheung LP, et al. : Progression of glucose intolerance and cardiometabolic risk factors over a decade in Chinese women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A case-control study. PLoS Med. 2019; 16 (10): e1002953. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 43. Adhyaru JS, Kemp C: Virtual reality as a tool to promote wellbeing in the workplace. Digit Health. 2022 Mar 4; 8 :205520762210844. Publisher Full Text 44. Ulas K, Semin I: The biological and motivational effects of aerobic exercise with virtual reality. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2021; 92 (3):321–326. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 45. Shaw LA, Buckley J, Corballis PM, et al. : Competition and cooperation with virtual players in an exergame. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 2016; 2 : e92. Publisher Full Text 46. Ertoy Karagol HI, Bakirtas A: New perspectives in the management of mild to moderate asthma in children. J Asthma Allergy. 2021 Mar 29; 14 :293–299. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 47. Mestre DR, Ewald M, Maiano C: Virtual reality and exercise: behavioral and psychological effects of visual feedback. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011; 167 :122–127. PubMed Abstract 48. Ben Saad H: Data of 14 participants in the RCT titled Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial. [Dataset]. Zenodo. 2024. (Last Visit: October 18, 2024). Publisher Full Text 49. Soudani M, Farhat F, Ghram A, et al. : CONSORT checklist for: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial. Zenodo. 2024. (Last visit: October 18, 2024). Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 15 Dec 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Research Laboratory Education, Motricity, Sport and Health LR19JS01, University of Sfax, Sfax, Sfax, 3000, Tunisia 2 Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Doha, 3050, Qatar 3 Research laboratory “Heart failure, LR12SP09”, Farhat HACHED Hospital,, University of Sousse, Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia 4 Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, University of Picardy Jules Verne, Amiens, Hauts-de-France, France Makrem Soudani Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Faical Farhat Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Amine Ghram Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Helmi Ben Saad Roles: Formal Analysis, Writing – Review & Editing Mehdi Chlif Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This study was supported by the Qatar National Library. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Article Versions (3) version 3 Revised Published: 18 Jul 2025, 12:1597 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.3 version 2 Revised Published: 27 Nov 2024, 12:1597 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.2 version 1 Published: 15 Dec 2023, 12:1597 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.1 Copyright © 2025 Soudani M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Soudani M, Farhat F, Ghram A et al. Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.143189.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 18 Jul 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.183944.r399210 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3#referee-response-399210 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 11 Aug 2025 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.183944.r399210 Author has made useful changes in revision, so no further changes are ... Continue reading READ ALL Author has made useful changes in revision, so no further changes are needed from my side. Article can be accepted for indexing in current state. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.183944.r399210 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3#referee-response-399210 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 27 Nov 2024 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Temlali TY. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r349413 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-349413 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 17 Jan 2025 Taha Yassine Temlali , Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r349413 The article examines the effects of two cycling exercise methods—traditional cycling using a stationary bike with a TV-based virtual cycling video and immersive virtual reality exercise (VRE) using a VR headset—on acute cognitive outcomes, vigor, and muscle spasticity in adolescents ... Continue reading READ ALL The article examines the effects of two cycling exercise methods—traditional cycling using a stationary bike with a TV-based virtual cycling video and immersive virtual reality exercise (VRE) using a VR headset—on acute cognitive outcomes, vigor, and muscle spasticity in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). The study contributes to the field by exploring the potential of VRE to enhance cognitive functions such as attention, vigor, and decision-making, with promising results suggesting VRE may outperform traditional cycling in these areas. The authors also provide valuable insights into how virtual environments can support physical activity in this population. However, several areas could be strengthened. Your manuscript would benefit from referencing existing literature to support the statements made throughout the paper. Several assertions are presented without citations, which weakens the overall credibility of your arguments. By integrating appropriate references, you would not only strengthen your claims but also clearly position your findings within the broader context of existing research, offering a stronger foundation for your conclusions. Additionally, it is important to report both significant and non-significant results accurately, as non-significant findings also contribute to the understanding of the topic. The message and argumentation in the paper could be made more cohesive. At the moment, some of the points seem disconnected and not fully developed. A more structured approach would help clarify the overall message and enhance the impact of your conclusions. A more focused argumentation would allow each point to contribute meaningfully, resulting in a stronger, well-supported narrative throughout the manuscript. In its current form, I believe the article can only be considered for indexing after major revisions, particularly in terms of strengthening the argumentation and ensuring clarity and proper citation of relevant research Please see the comments below: Introduction First, while VR is introduced as a promising tool for rehabilitation, the rationale for its application in CP rehabilitation could be further developed. Including details about how VR has been previously used in similar populations, such as individuals with other neurodevelopmental disorders, and identifying gaps in current use would provide a more robust foundation for the study. Specific examples of VR interventions in CP or related populations could also help underscore its potential impact on physical activity and rehabilitation. Additionally, expanding on why VR might be more effective or appealing than traditional exercise for individuals with CP would strengthen the argument. Clarification of the population under study is another area for improvement. The introduction mentions university students with CP but does not explain why this group is the focus. Is the choice motivated by unique challenges faced by this demographic, or is it due to a lack of research in this age group? This should be explicitly stated. Additionally, the term "university students" might imply young adults rather than adolescents. If the study targets a specific developmental stage, such as adolescents, this should be clarified to ensure relevance and accuracy in describing the population. The study’s novelty and relevance could be better emphasized. While the introduction mentions investigating acute effects of VR exercise, it does not explain why this focus is particularly important. Providing more context on the differences between acute and chronic exercise effects in CP would help justify this approach. Moreover, linking the study's findings to potential advancements in rehabilitation practices or future interventions would highlight its significance. For instance, how could this study build on or inform clinical practices or the development of VR technologies tailored to the needs of individuals with CP? Incorporating references to support claims about the innovative integration of VR in CP rehabilitation would further substantiate this argument. Key terms like Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE) and Traditional Exercise (TE) require clearer definitions. the study appears to inaccurately categorize one condition as "traditional cycling," despite incorporating a virtual component through a TV-based cycling video. This setup represents a basic virtual environment rather than a traditional exercise. Revising the terminology to accurately reflect the study design is crucial, and providing evidence from the literature to support the chosen terminology would strengthen the manuscript's credibility. The claim about the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system and studying acute effects could be enhanced by citing reviews or meta-analyses that emphasize the lack of VR-based interventions for adolescents with CP. Providing evidence that highlights this gap in the literature will make the argument more compelling and underscore the significance of the study. By addressing these areas, the introduction could provide a more comprehensive and compelling foundation for the study, ensuring clarity, proper contextualization, and stronger alignment with the study’s aims. Methods The methods section provides a detailed overview of the study design and procedures, but several areas lack references to substantiate key claims. Addressing these gaps with appropriate citations will enhance the credibility and robustness of the section. Please ensure that all variables assessed in this study are mentioned, along with the specific tests used for each of them. Game Selection and Rationale: The rationale for selecting specific games, which focus on immersive, interactive, and engaging experiences, needs to be backed by literature. Citing studies that explore the impact of such games on exercise adherence and participation in similar populations, particularly individuals with CP or other neurological conditions, would strengthen the argument for these choices. Furthermore, including references to guidelines or frameworks that highlight the criteria for selecting effective games (e.g., targeting specific muscle groups or promoting cognitive and social benefits) would validate the approach. Examples of lack of References for Key Claims: The text mentions the use of the VirZoom VRE system for cognitive stimulation, social interaction, and health outcomes but does not provide citations. Including studies or reviews that discuss these benefits in VR-based rehabilitation would establish credibility. General statements about the entertainment value of VR influencing exercise adherence and participation should be supported by research. Adding references to studies that demonstrate how entertainment and engagement impact adherence would make these assertions more persuasive. Customization and Rehabilitation Objectives: The statement regarding tailoring exercise experiences to individual rehabilitation objectives is an important point but would benefit from references to studies or examples that illustrate how customization in VR-based systems has been effective in rehabilitation contexts. Such evidence would demonstrate that the study’s approach aligns with best practices in the field. Analysis Assumption Testing No mention is made of other standard assumptions for ANOVA, such as normality and homogeneity of variances. Results Attention The reporting of results for attention lacks clarity and precision. The interaction effect is described as statistically significant (F(1,13)=6.30, p=0.026, ηp²=0.327), but these same values are also attributed to the main effect of exercise type, creating confusion about which effect is being discussed. Participants’ attention scores are stated to be higher in VRE compared to TE, but the actual means are missing, with only standard deviations provided, hindering a complete interpretation. Grammatical inconsistencies, such as the awkward phrasing "Participants’ mean response attention was higher," further obscure the findings and could be revised for clarity. The main effect of time (F(1,13)=97.066, p=0.001, ηp²=0.882) is reported as significant, but mean scores for pre- and post-training are absent. Additionally, the practical significance and implications of the findings, particularly the relationship between exercise type and attention, are not adequately explained, leaving their relevance unclear. Memory Several issues detract from the clarity of the memory results. The main effect of exercise type (F(1,13) = 3.059, p = 0.104, ηp² = 0.190) and the interaction effect (F(1,13) = 3.59, p = 0.104, ηp² = 0.190) are incorrectly described as statistically significant, despite a p-value of 0.104 not meeting the conventional significance threshold (p < 0.05). Misinterpreting p-values in this manner can mislead readers. The absence of mean scores for memory in the TE and VRE conditions further hinders the interpretation, as the claim that memory was higher in TE compared to VRE is unsupported by sufficient data; only standard deviations (SDs) are reported. The main effect of time (F(1,13) = 180.974, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.933) is validly described as significant, and it is the only result meeting significance criteria. Grammatical errors, such as "participants’ mean response memory were higher," should be corrected to "participants’ mean response memory was higher" to maintain proper subject-verb agreement. To improve readability, results should be reorganized into distinct paragraphs for main effects and interactions, explicitly stating which findings are significant and ensuring clarity in reporting. Total Score Several aspects of this section could be clarified to improve accuracy and readability. The interaction effect (F(1,13) = 19.118, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.595) is identical to the main effect of exercise type, suggesting a possible reporting error. Additionally, while standard deviations (SDs) for VRE and TE conditions are provided, the corresponding means are missing, limiting the ability to make meaningful comparisons. There is inconsistency in terminology, as the sentence "Descriptive statistics revealed that participants’ mean response attention was higher post-training" appears to incorrectly use "attention" instead of "total score." Furthermore, phrasing such as "Participants’ mean response total score were higher" should be revised for grammatical accuracy. To strengthen this section, it is essential to provide all key data points, including means, ensure precise terminology, and avoid redundancy in statistical reporting. Vigor The reporting of results for vigor is unclear and includes inaccuracies. Non-significant findings (F(1,13) = 2.576, p = 0.133, ηp² = 0.165) are described as meaningful, which is not true. Additionally, mean values are absent, and the provided standard deviations (SDs) are insufficient for meaningful comparisons. The term "statistically significant interaction" is incorrectly applied to a non-significant result (p = 0.133), further contributing to the inaccuracy. Decision-Making Correct While the significant main effect of exercise type (F(1,13) = 26.338, p = 0.01, ηp² = 0.670) is noted, the absence of mean values alongside SDs limits interpretability. The main effect of time (F(1,13) = 3.833, p = 0.72) is not significant but is misinterpreted as meaningful. Additionally, there is a labeling error where "mean response attention" is used instead of "decision-making," which needs correction. Consistent reporting of statistical values and terminology would clarify the findings. Decision-Making Errors Significant results (F(1,13) = 28.202, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.684) are presented without accompanying means, making SD comparisons incomplete. While the main effect of time (F(1,13) = 5.350, p = 0.038, ηp² = 0.292) is accurately reported, missing data (e.g., pre- and post-training means) undermines clarity. MAS This section highlights reductions in spasticity for TE and VRE groups, but vague language like "more substantial improvements" detracts from objectivity. The lack of statistical results to support these claims leaves readers uncertain about their validity. Including consistent numerical data (means, SDs, and test statistics) would enhance the reliability and precision of this section. Overall, these sections would benefit from clear and consistent reporting of means, SDs, and test statistics, precise terminology, and a focus on significant findings to improve the clarity and accuracy of the reported results. Discussion Inaccurate or Unsubstantiated Statements The paragraph lacks clear connection between the findings from Neumann et al. and the results of your study. Specifically, the reference to Neumann et al. seems somewhat disconnected, as their conclusion about VR not always being optimal for diverting attention from exercise-related cues does not directly align with your claim that VRE improves attention. The phrasing also suggests that VR increases the likelihood of positive impact and satisfaction, but this claim could benefit from more specific evidence or examples to support it. Additionally, the paragraph could be more concise by avoiding repetition, particularly in the mention of "attentional mechanisms" which is emphasized multiple times without adding new information. The relationship between the attention measured in your study and the statement "By directing attention towards the virtual environment, VR systems can increase..." is unclear. It would be helpful to clarify how the attention outcomes observed in your study specifically link to the direction of attention in the virtual environment and how this contributes to increased attention and satisfaction. Lastly, the connection between VR and attentional mechanisms is somewhat vague—clarifying how VR specifically impacts attention in your study would strengthen the argument. Some statements in the text lack alignment with the study's scope or findings, leading to inaccuracies. For example, the claim that “Our findings that VRE may be more advantageous than normal exercise for enhancing decision-making accuracy is supported previous study. 47 Mestre et al . 47 compared indoor cycling exercise with VR feedback vs. non-VR feedback and highlighted that cycling exercise with VR feedback had a reduced perceived exertion and an increased level of enjoyment of PA” is not accurate. The referenced study (Mestre et al.) explores perceived exertion and enjoyment and not decision making accuracy, so how does that study support your finding of enhanced decision making accuracy? Such strong conclusions should be either removed or referenced properly with studies that actually support your exact findings. Similarly, the statement, “VRE immediately following PA might have a more favorable impact on attention than TE,” implies an effect that is not explicitly tested or supported by the methodology. To ensure accuracy, it would be better to clearly describe the timing of measurements and avoid speculative claims. Another example is the assertion, “These results emphasize the potential advantages of incorporating VRE as a promising intervention... to enhance the physical well-being and motor skills of individuals with CP.” Since the study focuses on cognitive outcomes rather than motor skills or physical well-being, this statement should be removed or revised to avoid unsupported claims. The suggestion that “VRE with bike provides visual and auditory stimulation... which may distract users and draw attention away from muscle sensations” is plausible but not substantiated by the study’s results. To maintain credibility, the discussion should focus on observed outcomes and refrain from over-interpreting mechanisms without evidence or reference studies supporting your arguments. Over-generalizations Several statements in the text overreach beyond the study’s findings. For instance, “Evidence suggests that there is a link between attention, memory, and vigor immediately after exercise” is not supported by references and is overly broad and not directly addressed in the study. It would be more appropriate to focus on the relationships explicitly tested and observed or backed up by evidence from literature . Questionable Interpretations of Results example:Some interpretations of the study’s results are inconsistent or unclear. For example, the memory scores are described in conflicting terms, with significant differences mentioned in one part and a lack of significant interaction between exercise type and time stated in another. These contradictions should be clarified by revisiting the statistical results and ensuring consistency. And by giving appropriate explanation for this. Defensive Tone in Limitations The section on retrospective registration comes across as overly defensive, which detracts from the objectivity of the discussion. Instead of justifying this limitation extensively, it would be more effective to briefly acknowledge the retrospective registration and highlight measures taken to mitigate potential bias. This approach ensures transparency without appearing overly apologetic. Lack of Alignment Between Findings and Conclusions Certain recommendations for future research do not align with the study’s scope. For instance, the suggestion to investigate the long-term effects of the activities is valid but not directly supported by the current study, which focuses on short-term outcomes. To maintain alignment, this recommendation should be framed as exploratory and emphasize directions based on the study’s findings. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My expertise lies in exercise physiology, exergames, and physical activity research. While I have a strong foundation in these areas, my experience with statistics is limited, and I do not specialize in statistical analysis I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Temlali TY. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r349413 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-349413 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r343915 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-343915 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 28 Nov 2024 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r343915 I am well and fully satisfied with all the changes made by author in response to comments. I appreciate author 'efforts in this regard. So from my side, no further changes are required. This manuscript is ready to be ... Continue reading READ ALL I am well and fully satisfied with all the changes made by author in response to comments. I appreciate author 'efforts in this regard. So from my side, no further changes are required. This manuscript is ready to be indexed now. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r343915 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-343915 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 11 Sep 2025 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 11 Sep 2025 Author Response Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the ... Continue reading Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the process and your support in helping improve the quality of the paper. I’m pleased to hear that you are satisfied with the revisions. Warm regards, Amine Ghram Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the process and your support in helping improve the quality of the paper. I’m pleased to hear that you are satisfied with the revisions. Warm regards, Amine Ghram Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 11 Sep 2025 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 11 Sep 2025 Author Response Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the ... Continue reading Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the process and your support in helping improve the quality of the paper. I’m pleased to hear that you are satisfied with the revisions. Warm regards, Amine Ghram Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the process and your support in helping improve the quality of the paper. I’m pleased to hear that you are satisfied with the revisions. Warm regards, Amine Ghram Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 15 Dec 2023 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Chiu HC. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r237583 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-237583 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 30 May 2024 Hsiu-Ching Chiu , I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r237583 General comments The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of published RCT paper to ... Continue reading READ ALL General comments The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of published RCT paper to follow. Abstract. Not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Introduction-content Not read because method is very confusing. Methods: general -Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. -Randomization should be part of design, not separate paragraph. Methods: design Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes etc. Methods: Figure 1 Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Methods: participants -should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. -Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Methods: Intervention This is main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only 2 times training. Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristic of participants Results: Table 2 (missing).Differences between groups in all Outcomes across times Discussion and conclusion: Not read because method and results are very unstructured. Readability and style. This paper is not easy to read, because of unstructured and the fluency of English. For example, “….in adolescents with CP in North African college….” Not “In North African college adolescents with CP”. Another example, it may be clearer as “The Experimental group undertook xx …times a week for xx week….” Not “ Patients underwent two…” in the method. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? No Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? No Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My past research program was in understanding the relative contribution of motor impairments to activity limitation and participation in people with hemiplegic cerebral palsy (CP). I have finished one Cochrane review entitled as “Mechanically assisted walking training for walking, participation, and quality of life in children with cerebral palsy” for children with CP by examining outcomes across all domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Chiu HC. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r237583 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-237583 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 27 Nov 2024 Author Response Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, ... Continue reading Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of a published RCT paper to follow. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding our manuscript. We recognize the necessity for a more precise intervention design and consulted well-structured randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers to enhance the format and presentation of our work. Furthermore, we meticulously revised the intervention description to ensure adherence to the standard RCT formats. Action Taken: The intervention section has been revised to adhere to a more structured format commonly used in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This revision encompasses a clear delineation of the study design, intervention details, and outcome measures to enhance the methodological clarity and rigor. Reviewer Comment 2: Abstract not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently revised the abstract to incorporate specific details regarding intervention duration, thereby ensuring comprehensive information about the study's structure for readers. Action Taken: The abstract now incorporates the following information (Lines 30–32): " The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of virtual reality exercise (VRE) compared to traditional exercise (TE), conducted in a controlled laboratory environment . " This addition provided essential details regarding the intervention and enhanced the comprehensiveness of the abstract. Reviewer Comment 3: Introduction not read because method is very confusing. Response: We acknowledge the ambiguity engendered by the initial organization of the methods section. To rectify this issue, we have restructured both the Introduction and Methods sections to enhance the clarity and logical progression. Action Taken: The Introduction has been revised to ensure enhanced alignment with the study's methodology and objectives. Furthermore, the Methods section provides a comprehensive, sequential explanation of the intervention and study design, thereby minimizing potential ambiguities. Reviewer Comment 4: Method: - Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. - Randomization should be part of design, not a separate paragraph. Response: We would like to acknowledge this recommendation. Redundant ethical considerations were eliminated, and the randomization process was integrated into the study design section to enhance the coherence of the presentation. Action Taken: The randomization protocol has been relocated to the design section (lines 175–176), and superfluous ethical considerations have been eliminated to enhance conciseness and clarity. Reviewer Comment 5: Method: Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes, etc. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have provided supplementary information concerning the study design, encompassing training protocols and specific outcomes. Action Taken: The Methods section now delineates the training regimen, outcome measures, and data collection processes, thereby ensuring that the study design is fully transparent and adheres to RCT guidelines. Reviewer Comment 6: Methods: Figure 1 - Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The intervention duration was clarified, and a concise description of the intervention for both groups was provided (Figure 1). Action Taken: Figure 1 demonstrates that the intervention was implemented as a single-session trial and a concise description of the intervention protocols for both groups was provided. Reviewer Comment 7: Methods: participants - Should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. - Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Response: We agree with the reviewer's recommendations. The term "participants" has been substituted for "patients" throughout the manuscript, and the precise number of participants, along with their demographic characteristics, has been moved to the Results section. Action Taken: The term "patients" has been replaced with "participants" throughout the manuscript, and the characteristics of participants have been incorporated into the results section (Lines 301, Table 1). Reviewer Comment 8: Methods: Intervention - This is the main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only two times training. Response: This study has several limitations. While the present investigation focused on the immediate effects of a single session, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of repeated interventions. This limitation has been addressed in the Discussion section. Action Taken: This study acknowledges this limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate extended interventions to evaluate the cumulative effects of repeated VRE sessions. Reviewer Comment 9: Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristics of participants. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently incorporated Table 1, which delineates the participants' characteristics including age, sex, and pertinent demographic data. Action Taken: Table 1 has been incorporated into the Results section, presenting the characteristics of the study participants as requested. Reviewer Comment 10: Results: Table 2 (missing). Differences between groups in all outcomes across times. Response: Table 2 presents the differences between the groups across all outcome measures and time points. Action Taken: Table 2 has been added to the Results section to show the differences in outcomes between the traditional exercise and VRE groups. Reviewer Comment 11: The discussion and conclusion have not been read because the method and results are unstructured. Response: The Methods and Results sections have been restructured to enhance the clarity and logical progression. The discussion has been aligned to provide a coherent narrative that establishes connections among the methods, results, and conclusions. Action Taken: The Methods, Results, and Discussion sections were restructured to enhance clarity, thereby improving the accessibility and logical organization of the manuscript. Reviewer Comment 12: This paper is not easy to read because of unstructured format and fluency of English. Response: The authors acknowledge concerns regarding readability and fluency. The manuscript has undergone a comprehensive revision to enhance both the structure and fluency of the English language, thereby ensuring a more lucid and professional presentation. Action Taken: The manuscript has undergone comprehensive revision to enhance clarity, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency, thereby improving readability while maintaining scholarly rigor. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the clarity, structure, and scientific rigor of our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback, and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations. Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of a published RCT paper to follow. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding our manuscript. We recognize the necessity for a more precise intervention design and consulted well-structured randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers to enhance the format and presentation of our work. Furthermore, we meticulously revised the intervention description to ensure adherence to the standard RCT formats. Action Taken: The intervention section has been revised to adhere to a more structured format commonly used in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This revision encompasses a clear delineation of the study design, intervention details, and outcome measures to enhance the methodological clarity and rigor. Reviewer Comment 2: Abstract not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently revised the abstract to incorporate specific details regarding intervention duration, thereby ensuring comprehensive information about the study's structure for readers. Action Taken: The abstract now incorporates the following information (Lines 30–32): " The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of virtual reality exercise (VRE) compared to traditional exercise (TE), conducted in a controlled laboratory environment . " This addition provided essential details regarding the intervention and enhanced the comprehensiveness of the abstract. Reviewer Comment 3: Introduction not read because method is very confusing. Response: We acknowledge the ambiguity engendered by the initial organization of the methods section. To rectify this issue, we have restructured both the Introduction and Methods sections to enhance the clarity and logical progression. Action Taken: The Introduction has been revised to ensure enhanced alignment with the study's methodology and objectives. Furthermore, the Methods section provides a comprehensive, sequential explanation of the intervention and study design, thereby minimizing potential ambiguities. Reviewer Comment 4: Method: - Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. - Randomization should be part of design, not a separate paragraph. Response: We would like to acknowledge this recommendation. Redundant ethical considerations were eliminated, and the randomization process was integrated into the study design section to enhance the coherence of the presentation. Action Taken: The randomization protocol has been relocated to the design section (lines 175–176), and superfluous ethical considerations have been eliminated to enhance conciseness and clarity. Reviewer Comment 5: Method: Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes, etc. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have provided supplementary information concerning the study design, encompassing training protocols and specific outcomes. Action Taken: The Methods section now delineates the training regimen, outcome measures, and data collection processes, thereby ensuring that the study design is fully transparent and adheres to RCT guidelines. Reviewer Comment 6: Methods: Figure 1 - Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The intervention duration was clarified, and a concise description of the intervention for both groups was provided (Figure 1). Action Taken: Figure 1 demonstrates that the intervention was implemented as a single-session trial and a concise description of the intervention protocols for both groups was provided. Reviewer Comment 7: Methods: participants - Should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. - Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Response: We agree with the reviewer's recommendations. The term "participants" has been substituted for "patients" throughout the manuscript, and the precise number of participants, along with their demographic characteristics, has been moved to the Results section. Action Taken: The term "patients" has been replaced with "participants" throughout the manuscript, and the characteristics of participants have been incorporated into the results section (Lines 301, Table 1). Reviewer Comment 8: Methods: Intervention - This is the main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only two times training. Response: This study has several limitations. While the present investigation focused on the immediate effects of a single session, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of repeated interventions. This limitation has been addressed in the Discussion section. Action Taken: This study acknowledges this limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate extended interventions to evaluate the cumulative effects of repeated VRE sessions. Reviewer Comment 9: Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristics of participants. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently incorporated Table 1, which delineates the participants' characteristics including age, sex, and pertinent demographic data. Action Taken: Table 1 has been incorporated into the Results section, presenting the characteristics of the study participants as requested. Reviewer Comment 10: Results: Table 2 (missing). Differences between groups in all outcomes across times. Response: Table 2 presents the differences between the groups across all outcome measures and time points. Action Taken: Table 2 has been added to the Results section to show the differences in outcomes between the traditional exercise and VRE groups. Reviewer Comment 11: The discussion and conclusion have not been read because the method and results are unstructured. Response: The Methods and Results sections have been restructured to enhance the clarity and logical progression. The discussion has been aligned to provide a coherent narrative that establishes connections among the methods, results, and conclusions. Action Taken: The Methods, Results, and Discussion sections were restructured to enhance clarity, thereby improving the accessibility and logical organization of the manuscript. Reviewer Comment 12: This paper is not easy to read because of unstructured format and fluency of English. Response: The authors acknowledge concerns regarding readability and fluency. The manuscript has undergone a comprehensive revision to enhance both the structure and fluency of the English language, thereby ensuring a more lucid and professional presentation. Action Taken: The manuscript has undergone comprehensive revision to enhance clarity, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency, thereby improving readability while maintaining scholarly rigor. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the clarity, structure, and scientific rigor of our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback, and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations. Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 27 Nov 2024 Author Response Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, ... Continue reading Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of a published RCT paper to follow. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding our manuscript. We recognize the necessity for a more precise intervention design and consulted well-structured randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers to enhance the format and presentation of our work. Furthermore, we meticulously revised the intervention description to ensure adherence to the standard RCT formats. Action Taken: The intervention section has been revised to adhere to a more structured format commonly used in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This revision encompasses a clear delineation of the study design, intervention details, and outcome measures to enhance the methodological clarity and rigor. Reviewer Comment 2: Abstract not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently revised the abstract to incorporate specific details regarding intervention duration, thereby ensuring comprehensive information about the study's structure for readers. Action Taken: The abstract now incorporates the following information (Lines 30–32): " The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of virtual reality exercise (VRE) compared to traditional exercise (TE), conducted in a controlled laboratory environment . " This addition provided essential details regarding the intervention and enhanced the comprehensiveness of the abstract. Reviewer Comment 3: Introduction not read because method is very confusing. Response: We acknowledge the ambiguity engendered by the initial organization of the methods section. To rectify this issue, we have restructured both the Introduction and Methods sections to enhance the clarity and logical progression. Action Taken: The Introduction has been revised to ensure enhanced alignment with the study's methodology and objectives. Furthermore, the Methods section provides a comprehensive, sequential explanation of the intervention and study design, thereby minimizing potential ambiguities. Reviewer Comment 4: Method: - Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. - Randomization should be part of design, not a separate paragraph. Response: We would like to acknowledge this recommendation. Redundant ethical considerations were eliminated, and the randomization process was integrated into the study design section to enhance the coherence of the presentation. Action Taken: The randomization protocol has been relocated to the design section (lines 175–176), and superfluous ethical considerations have been eliminated to enhance conciseness and clarity. Reviewer Comment 5: Method: Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes, etc. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have provided supplementary information concerning the study design, encompassing training protocols and specific outcomes. Action Taken: The Methods section now delineates the training regimen, outcome measures, and data collection processes, thereby ensuring that the study design is fully transparent and adheres to RCT guidelines. Reviewer Comment 6: Methods: Figure 1 - Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The intervention duration was clarified, and a concise description of the intervention for both groups was provided (Figure 1). Action Taken: Figure 1 demonstrates that the intervention was implemented as a single-session trial and a concise description of the intervention protocols for both groups was provided. Reviewer Comment 7: Methods: participants - Should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. - Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Response: We agree with the reviewer's recommendations. The term "participants" has been substituted for "patients" throughout the manuscript, and the precise number of participants, along with their demographic characteristics, has been moved to the Results section. Action Taken: The term "patients" has been replaced with "participants" throughout the manuscript, and the characteristics of participants have been incorporated into the results section (Lines 301, Table 1). Reviewer Comment 8: Methods: Intervention - This is the main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only two times training. Response: This study has several limitations. While the present investigation focused on the immediate effects of a single session, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of repeated interventions. This limitation has been addressed in the Discussion section. Action Taken: This study acknowledges this limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate extended interventions to evaluate the cumulative effects of repeated VRE sessions. Reviewer Comment 9: Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristics of participants. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently incorporated Table 1, which delineates the participants' characteristics including age, sex, and pertinent demographic data. Action Taken: Table 1 has been incorporated into the Results section, presenting the characteristics of the study participants as requested. Reviewer Comment 10: Results: Table 2 (missing). Differences between groups in all outcomes across times. Response: Table 2 presents the differences between the groups across all outcome measures and time points. Action Taken: Table 2 has been added to the Results section to show the differences in outcomes between the traditional exercise and VRE groups. Reviewer Comment 11: The discussion and conclusion have not been read because the method and results are unstructured. Response: The Methods and Results sections have been restructured to enhance the clarity and logical progression. The discussion has been aligned to provide a coherent narrative that establishes connections among the methods, results, and conclusions. Action Taken: The Methods, Results, and Discussion sections were restructured to enhance clarity, thereby improving the accessibility and logical organization of the manuscript. Reviewer Comment 12: This paper is not easy to read because of unstructured format and fluency of English. Response: The authors acknowledge concerns regarding readability and fluency. The manuscript has undergone a comprehensive revision to enhance both the structure and fluency of the English language, thereby ensuring a more lucid and professional presentation. Action Taken: The manuscript has undergone comprehensive revision to enhance clarity, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency, thereby improving readability while maintaining scholarly rigor. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the clarity, structure, and scientific rigor of our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback, and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations. Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of a published RCT paper to follow. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding our manuscript. We recognize the necessity for a more precise intervention design and consulted well-structured randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers to enhance the format and presentation of our work. Furthermore, we meticulously revised the intervention description to ensure adherence to the standard RCT formats. Action Taken: The intervention section has been revised to adhere to a more structured format commonly used in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This revision encompasses a clear delineation of the study design, intervention details, and outcome measures to enhance the methodological clarity and rigor. Reviewer Comment 2: Abstract not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently revised the abstract to incorporate specific details regarding intervention duration, thereby ensuring comprehensive information about the study's structure for readers. Action Taken: The abstract now incorporates the following information (Lines 30–32): " The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of virtual reality exercise (VRE) compared to traditional exercise (TE), conducted in a controlled laboratory environment . " This addition provided essential details regarding the intervention and enhanced the comprehensiveness of the abstract. Reviewer Comment 3: Introduction not read because method is very confusing. Response: We acknowledge the ambiguity engendered by the initial organization of the methods section. To rectify this issue, we have restructured both the Introduction and Methods sections to enhance the clarity and logical progression. Action Taken: The Introduction has been revised to ensure enhanced alignment with the study's methodology and objectives. Furthermore, the Methods section provides a comprehensive, sequential explanation of the intervention and study design, thereby minimizing potential ambiguities. Reviewer Comment 4: Method: - Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. - Randomization should be part of design, not a separate paragraph. Response: We would like to acknowledge this recommendation. Redundant ethical considerations were eliminated, and the randomization process was integrated into the study design section to enhance the coherence of the presentation. Action Taken: The randomization protocol has been relocated to the design section (lines 175–176), and superfluous ethical considerations have been eliminated to enhance conciseness and clarity. Reviewer Comment 5: Method: Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes, etc. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have provided supplementary information concerning the study design, encompassing training protocols and specific outcomes. Action Taken: The Methods section now delineates the training regimen, outcome measures, and data collection processes, thereby ensuring that the study design is fully transparent and adheres to RCT guidelines. Reviewer Comment 6: Methods: Figure 1 - Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The intervention duration was clarified, and a concise description of the intervention for both groups was provided (Figure 1). Action Taken: Figure 1 demonstrates that the intervention was implemented as a single-session trial and a concise description of the intervention protocols for both groups was provided. Reviewer Comment 7: Methods: participants - Should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. - Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Response: We agree with the reviewer's recommendations. The term "participants" has been substituted for "patients" throughout the manuscript, and the precise number of participants, along with their demographic characteristics, has been moved to the Results section. Action Taken: The term "patients" has been replaced with "participants" throughout the manuscript, and the characteristics of participants have been incorporated into the results section (Lines 301, Table 1). Reviewer Comment 8: Methods: Intervention - This is the main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only two times training. Response: This study has several limitations. While the present investigation focused on the immediate effects of a single session, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of repeated interventions. This limitation has been addressed in the Discussion section. Action Taken: This study acknowledges this limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate extended interventions to evaluate the cumulative effects of repeated VRE sessions. Reviewer Comment 9: Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristics of participants. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently incorporated Table 1, which delineates the participants' characteristics including age, sex, and pertinent demographic data. Action Taken: Table 1 has been incorporated into the Results section, presenting the characteristics of the study participants as requested. Reviewer Comment 10: Results: Table 2 (missing). Differences between groups in all outcomes across times. Response: Table 2 presents the differences between the groups across all outcome measures and time points. Action Taken: Table 2 has been added to the Results section to show the differences in outcomes between the traditional exercise and VRE groups. Reviewer Comment 11: The discussion and conclusion have not been read because the method and results are unstructured. Response: The Methods and Results sections have been restructured to enhance the clarity and logical progression. The discussion has been aligned to provide a coherent narrative that establishes connections among the methods, results, and conclusions. Action Taken: The Methods, Results, and Discussion sections were restructured to enhance clarity, thereby improving the accessibility and logical organization of the manuscript. Reviewer Comment 12: This paper is not easy to read because of unstructured format and fluency of English. Response: The authors acknowledge concerns regarding readability and fluency. The manuscript has undergone a comprehensive revision to enhance both the structure and fluency of the English language, thereby ensuring a more lucid and professional presentation. Action Taken: The manuscript has undergone comprehensive revision to enhance clarity, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency, thereby improving readability while maintaining scholarly rigor. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the clarity, structure, and scientific rigor of our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback, and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations. Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r248808 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-248808 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 29 Mar 2024 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r248808 This article investigated the immediate effects of virtual reality exercise (VRE) bike games on young adults in North Africa with cerebral palsy (CP). Its brief description is as under: Study Design: Randomized controlled trial (considered a ... Continue reading READ ALL This article investigated the immediate effects of virtual reality exercise (VRE) bike games on young adults in North Africa with cerebral palsy (CP). Its brief description is as under: Study Design: Randomized controlled trial (considered a gold standard for clinical research) Participants: 14 college students (average age 15.6) diagnosed with CP Intervention: Participants were divided into two groups. One group exercised using VR bike games for 40 minutes (VRE group), while the other group participated in traditional exercise (TE group) for the same duration. Outcomes: The study measured changes in attention, vigor (energy levels), and decision-making abilities after the exercise sessions. Key Findings: Compared to traditional exercise, VR exercise led to significant improvements in attention and vigor. Its Clinical Relevance: Cerebral palsy can impair both physical function and mental well-being. This study suggests VR exercise could be a valuable tool for improving cognitive function and motivation in young adults with CP. VR's engaging nature might make exercise more enjoyable and help individuals with CP adhere to exercise routines. However, it's important to note that the study only looked at short-term effects. More research is needed to confirm these findings and explore the long-term benefits of VR exercise for CP management. This article is well written, however following major and minor changes will improve its quality for publication. Minor Changes needed: In abstract section; Briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. In introduction section: Emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP , highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then, briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. In methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Briefly explain the rationale behind choosing specific games on the VirZoom VRE for the study. Major Changes needed: a- In result section, please make following changes. Demographic characteristics should be presented as group wise. Because you have two groups, therefore, split age, gender etc. group wise. You can make three groups as TE, VRE and Total study population too. Mention the name of statistical test which you have used in stats of Table-2. You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor too which is not the case as per stats of the study. Correct this. Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can say present study or current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. While acknowledging limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the possible mechanisms by which VRE might be exerting its effects on various outcomes. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Mahmood Q. Reviewer Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r248808 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-248808 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 27 Nov 2024 Author Response Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting ... Continue reading Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting a more balanced view of results, particularly regarding memory, is crucial for accuracy and transparency. The abstract has been revised to reflect heterogeneous findings on memory, ensuring that it aligns with the overall outcomes of the study. Action Taken: The following statement was incorporated into the abstract (lines 33–37):’ Fourteen participants (42.9% female) were included in this analysis, and the results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance . " This modification ensures a comprehensive interpretation of the findings and prepares readers for the study's conclusions. Reviewer Comment 2: In the introduction section, emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP, highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Response: Thank you for your constructive feedback. To emphasize the novelty and significance of our investigation, we restructured the introduction to focus on the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). This modification highlights the research gap that our study addresses and underscores the unique contribution of our work to the field. Action Taken: The following passage was incorporated into the introduction (lines 71–78):’ This study represents a significant advancement in elucidating the relationship between acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive health, there remains a notable gap in our understanding of how a single bout of exercise affects cognitive function in this specific population. This study was motivated by a growing body of evidence suggesting that acute aerobic exercise positively influences cognitive function, mood, and memory in various populations. However, these effects remain relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, particularly those with CP. This gap underscores the need for targeted research to elucidate how acute exercise can be utilized to enhance cognitive outcomes in this vulnerable population . " This addition enhances the novelty of our study and elucidates how our research addresses a gap in the literature in accordance with the reviewer's recommendation. Reviewer Comment 3: Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Response: We acknowledge your comprehensive feedback regarding the structure of the Introduction. In accordance with your recommendation, we have restructured the introduction to initially address the gap in current knowledge concerning acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), subsequently transitioning to existing evidence on virtual reality (VR) as a modality for promoting physical activity. This revised organization enhances the clarity of the narrative and establishes a logical progression towards the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Action Taken: The introduction now commences with a discussion of the limited research on acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP, followed by a brief mention of VR's effectiveness of VR (Lines 96–103). " This study represents a significant advancement in understanding the impact of technology, specifically virtual reality (VR), on the well-being of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Although previous studies have established the benefits of regular physical activity in adults with CP, there is a paucity of data regarding the immediate effects of exercise, particularly on cognitive performance, in adolescents with CP. The objective of our randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the physiological and psychological effects of using the VirZoom VR exercise cycle with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. This study aimed to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affection, memory, and decision-making abilities. This research contributes valuable insights into a critical topic that has received limited attention in this specific population . " This reorganization provided a more coherent rationale for the study and more effectively established the context for the research question. Reviewer Comment 4 : Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. Response: We appreciate your recommendation. It is acknowledged that the term "psychophysiological outcomes" may not be familiar to all readers; therefore, a concise definition has been incorporated to enhance comprehension for a broader audience. Action Taken: The following definition has been incorporated (lines 53–56):’ Psychophysiological outcomes refer to the observable effects of psychological processes on the physiological functions of the body (8). Psychophysiology is the scientific study of how cognitive processes, emotional states, and behaviors influence physiological responses, including heart rate, blood pressure, hormone levels, and brain function (9). " This succinct definition ensures that all readers, irrespective of their expertise, comprehend this crucial term and its significance to this study. Reviewer Comment 5: In the methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Response: We acknowledge your feedback and concur that it is essential to emphasize the novelty of the VirZoom VRE system, particularly its application in adolescents with CP. The utilization of immersive VR technology in exercise interventions for this population represents a relatively nascent area of research, and we have elucidated this novelty more explicitly in the methodology section. Action Taken: We revised the methodology section to include the following statement (Lines 128–152):’ it is essential to emphasize the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in comparison to TE bikes, particularly within the context of adolescents with CP. Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increase physical activity and improve health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. By incorporating games that target specific muscle groups, movement patterns, and cognitive skills, we can tailor the exercise experience to align it with the individual rehabilitation objectives and interests of our participants. By emphasizing the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in this study, we underscore its potential to transform the delivery of physical activity interventions for adolescents with CP, ultimately leading to improved health outcomes and enhanced quality of life for this population. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system for our study is based on several rationales. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of physical activities that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research indicates that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation. Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants (31). Lastly, we aim to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention ." This explanation emphasizes the innovative nature of the intervention and its potential benefits, thereby elucidating the study's contribution to the field. Major Changes needed: a-In the result section, please make following changes. Response to Reviewer’s Comment We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to present demographic characteristics in a group-wise format. This change enhanced the clarity and comprehensibility of the participants’ data. Action Taken: We created a new Table 1 that presents the demographic characteristics for each group (TE, VRE) as well as for the total study population. The table is formatted as follows. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants (refer the below link) https://f1000research.s3.amazonaws.com/linked/685666.Table_1_Demographic_Characteristics_of_Participants.pdf This table enhances the presentation of demographic data and provides a clearer comparison between the groups in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. Reviewer Comment 6 • Mention the name of the statistical test that you have used in stats in Table-2. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the statistical analysis of our study. You are correct that we should have explicitly mentioned the statistical tests used for the results presented in Table 2. We appreciate your attention to detail and opportunity to clarify this important aspect of our methodology. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to include the specific statistical tests used for the analysis presented in Table 2. The statistical method has been added to the "Statistical analysis" section of the Methods and referenced in the table caption. Text added in text: line number 283-291 in bold " A 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (Traditional Exercise vs. Virtual Reality Exercise) and time (Pre vs. Post) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to analysis, Mauchly's test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly's test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. Main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. )." Additionally, we updated the caption for Table 2 : line number 308 in "Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA." We believe that these additions have clarified the statistical method used and addressed your concerns. The use of repeated-measures ANOVA is appropriate for our study design as it allows us to examine the effects of both exercise type and time, as well as their interaction, on our outcome measures. Reviewer Comment 7 • You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor, too, which is not the case as per the stats of the study. Correct this. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the reporting of vigor results. We appreciate your detailed attention. Upon re-evaluation of the statistical analysis, we corrected the manuscript to remove any references to significant changes in vigor. Action Taken: The updated text accurately reflects that the analysis did not indicate significant changes in vigor, according to the statistical results. The previous statement, "significant changes were observed in vigor," has been removed and replaced with " Exercise type had no significant changes on patient vigor ." This correction can be found in the revised manuscript in the Results section (line 132). We have made necessary revisions to ensure clarity and accuracy in reporting the findings. Thank you for helping us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 8 • Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. Response: Thank you for your suggestion regarding the reporting of participants' ages. We appreciate your attention to the details and your recommendations to enhance the precision of our demographic data. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to report participants' ages in months instead of years. Specifically, in the Results section, line 306, we have changed "15.6 ± 0.7 years" to "163.57 ± 41.58 months. This modification provides a more precise representation of the participants' ages and aligns with the best practices for reporting developmental data for adolescent populations. We believe that this change has improved the clarity and accuracy of our demographic information. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 9 • How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Response: Thank you for your insightful comments regarding the measurement of the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) readings. We appreciate your attention to methodological rigor. Action Taken: In the revised manuscript, we have clarified that three readings of the MAS were taken for each joint to ensure reliability and accuracy. To adhere to established practices in the literature, we calculated and used the mean of these readings in our analysis. This adjustment is reflected in the Methods section, specifically on line 278, where we now state that "The mean of three MAS readings was used for each joint assessment." We believe that this change enhances the validity of our findings and aligns our methodology with the standard practices in the field. Thank you for your valuable feedback, which has helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 10 • Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding Table 3. We appreciate your attention to the details and emphasize the importance of statistical significance in reporting the results. Action Taken: We updated Table 3 to include the significance levels (p-values) for all reported outcomes. This clarifies the statistical significance of the changes observed in the present study. Specifically, we have added p-values in the last column of Table 3, which can be found in the revised manuscript. Moreover, we have revised the text to ensure that any claims of significance are supported by the corresponding statistical outcomes, which enhances the transparency and rigor of our results, aligning our reporting with best practices in the literature. Thank you for your constructive suggestions, which helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 11 b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Reviewer Comment 12 • Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can refer to the present study or the current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding the use of personal pronouns in research writing. We agree that maintaining an objective tone is important in scientific communication. Action Taken: We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and made the following changes: Replaced "our study" with "the present study" the present study’ throughout the document. Changed, "we found" to "results exhibit" where applicable. Replaced "we suggest" with "the current study suggests" as appropriate. Removed all instances of "I" and "my" from the manuscript. These revisions can be found throughout the document, particularly in the Results section and Discussion section .We believe that these changes have improved the objectivity and professionalism of our writing, while maintaining clarity. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 13 • While acknowledging the limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the language used to discuss the potential benefits of Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE). We appreciate your emphasis on the importance of using cautious language, especially when addressing areas with mixed or inconclusive findings. Action Taken: In response to your comment, we have thoroughly revised the discussion section to incorporate a more nuanced and careful approach in describing the potential benefits of VRE. Specifically, we have: Emphasizing the need for further research by stating that while some findings suggest benefits, it is crucial to recognize that other studies present mixed results . This balanced perspective is vital for accurately conveying the current state of the literature. We acknowledge the limitations of our study in terms of the generalizability of the findings. We explicitly state that additional evidence is necessary to substantiate the claims made regarding VRE , ensuring that our conclusions are firmly grounded in the available data. Utilizing cautious phrases such as "may suggest" and "could potentially contribute" could potentially contribute’ instead of making definitive statements. For instance, we have replaced "VRE improves cognitive function" with "VRE may improve cognitive function," effectively communicating the tentative nature of our findings. We believe these changes enhance the rigor and credibility of our discussion, providing a more accurate representation of the potential benefits of VRE while also emphasizing the need for further research in this area. Thank you for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in improving the quality and integrity of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 14 If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the mechanisms through which VRE might exert its effects on various outcomes. Response: We appreciate your insightful comment regarding the potential mechanisms by which virtual reality exercises (VRE) may influence various outcomes. Your suggestion to deepen the exploration of these mechanisms in the discussion is highly valued. Action Taken: In response to your feedback, we have significantly expanded the discussion section to offer a more comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms underlying the effects of VRE. The specific revisions are as follows. Discussion of Engagement and Motivation : We elaborated on the role of VRE in enhancing participant engagement through immersive experiences, which can lead to increased motivation and adherence to exercise programs. For instance, we revised line 352 from "VRE can increase motivation" to "The immersive nature of VRE may lead to heightened motivation, which is essential for improving physical activity levels." Exploration of Cognitive Function : We have included a detailed discussion on how VRE may facilitate cognitive engagement by requiring participants to interact with dynamic environments. In line 360, we modified the text from "VRE may help cognitive function" to "VRE potentially stimulates cognitive function by challenging participants to make quick decisions and adapt to changing virtual scenarios." Highlighting Social Interaction Effects : We addressed the potential of VRE to promote social interaction and support, which could further enhance its effectiveness. In line 375, we revised the statement from "VRE can be done alone or with others" to "Engaging in VRE in a group setting may foster social bonds, providing psychological benefits that contribute to overall well-being." Consideration of Physiological Responses : Finally, we examined the physiological responses associated with exercise in a virtual environment, positing that increased heart rate and caloric expenditure may arise from the interactive nature of VRE. We updated line 385 from "VRE involves physical activity" to "The interactive features of VRE may elicit greater physiological arousal, potentially leading to enhanced cardiovascular benefits." These enhancements are reflected in the discussion section, particularly between lines 350 and 390, where we now present a well-rounded perspective on the mechanisms through which VRE may exert its effects on various outcomes. Incorporating these insights significantly strengthens the discussion and provides a more thorough understanding of the potential benefits of VRE. We are grateful for your valuable feedback, which has contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript . Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting a more balanced view of results, particularly regarding memory, is crucial for accuracy and transparency. The abstract has been revised to reflect heterogeneous findings on memory, ensuring that it aligns with the overall outcomes of the study. Action Taken: The following statement was incorporated into the abstract (lines 33–37):’ Fourteen participants (42.9% female) were included in this analysis, and the results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance . " This modification ensures a comprehensive interpretation of the findings and prepares readers for the study's conclusions. Reviewer Comment 2: In the introduction section, emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP, highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Response: Thank you for your constructive feedback. To emphasize the novelty and significance of our investigation, we restructured the introduction to focus on the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). This modification highlights the research gap that our study addresses and underscores the unique contribution of our work to the field. Action Taken: The following passage was incorporated into the introduction (lines 71–78):’ This study represents a significant advancement in elucidating the relationship between acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive health, there remains a notable gap in our understanding of how a single bout of exercise affects cognitive function in this specific population. This study was motivated by a growing body of evidence suggesting that acute aerobic exercise positively influences cognitive function, mood, and memory in various populations. However, these effects remain relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, particularly those with CP. This gap underscores the need for targeted research to elucidate how acute exercise can be utilized to enhance cognitive outcomes in this vulnerable population . " This addition enhances the novelty of our study and elucidates how our research addresses a gap in the literature in accordance with the reviewer's recommendation. Reviewer Comment 3: Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Response: We acknowledge your comprehensive feedback regarding the structure of the Introduction. In accordance with your recommendation, we have restructured the introduction to initially address the gap in current knowledge concerning acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), subsequently transitioning to existing evidence on virtual reality (VR) as a modality for promoting physical activity. This revised organization enhances the clarity of the narrative and establishes a logical progression towards the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Action Taken: The introduction now commences with a discussion of the limited research on acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP, followed by a brief mention of VR's effectiveness of VR (Lines 96–103). " This study represents a significant advancement in understanding the impact of technology, specifically virtual reality (VR), on the well-being of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Although previous studies have established the benefits of regular physical activity in adults with CP, there is a paucity of data regarding the immediate effects of exercise, particularly on cognitive performance, in adolescents with CP. The objective of our randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the physiological and psychological effects of using the VirZoom VR exercise cycle with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. This study aimed to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affection, memory, and decision-making abilities. This research contributes valuable insights into a critical topic that has received limited attention in this specific population . " This reorganization provided a more coherent rationale for the study and more effectively established the context for the research question. Reviewer Comment 4 : Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. Response: We appreciate your recommendation. It is acknowledged that the term "psychophysiological outcomes" may not be familiar to all readers; therefore, a concise definition has been incorporated to enhance comprehension for a broader audience. Action Taken: The following definition has been incorporated (lines 53–56):’ Psychophysiological outcomes refer to the observable effects of psychological processes on the physiological functions of the body (8). Psychophysiology is the scientific study of how cognitive processes, emotional states, and behaviors influence physiological responses, including heart rate, blood pressure, hormone levels, and brain function (9). " This succinct definition ensures that all readers, irrespective of their expertise, comprehend this crucial term and its significance to this study. Reviewer Comment 5: In the methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Response: We acknowledge your feedback and concur that it is essential to emphasize the novelty of the VirZoom VRE system, particularly its application in adolescents with CP. The utilization of immersive VR technology in exercise interventions for this population represents a relatively nascent area of research, and we have elucidated this novelty more explicitly in the methodology section. Action Taken: We revised the methodology section to include the following statement (Lines 128–152):’ it is essential to emphasize the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in comparison to TE bikes, particularly within the context of adolescents with CP. Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increase physical activity and improve health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. By incorporating games that target specific muscle groups, movement patterns, and cognitive skills, we can tailor the exercise experience to align it with the individual rehabilitation objectives and interests of our participants. By emphasizing the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in this study, we underscore its potential to transform the delivery of physical activity interventions for adolescents with CP, ultimately leading to improved health outcomes and enhanced quality of life for this population. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system for our study is based on several rationales. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of physical activities that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research indicates that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation. Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants (31). Lastly, we aim to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention ." This explanation emphasizes the innovative nature of the intervention and its potential benefits, thereby elucidating the study's contribution to the field. Major Changes needed: a-In the result section, please make following changes. Response to Reviewer’s Comment We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to present demographic characteristics in a group-wise format. This change enhanced the clarity and comprehensibility of the participants’ data. Action Taken: We created a new Table 1 that presents the demographic characteristics for each group (TE, VRE) as well as for the total study population. The table is formatted as follows. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants (refer the below link) https://f1000research.s3.amazonaws.com/linked/685666.Table_1_Demographic_Characteristics_of_Participants.pdf This table enhances the presentation of demographic data and provides a clearer comparison between the groups in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. Reviewer Comment 6 • Mention the name of the statistical test that you have used in stats in Table-2. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the statistical analysis of our study. You are correct that we should have explicitly mentioned the statistical tests used for the results presented in Table 2. We appreciate your attention to detail and opportunity to clarify this important aspect of our methodology. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to include the specific statistical tests used for the analysis presented in Table 2. The statistical method has been added to the "Statistical analysis" section of the Methods and referenced in the table caption. Text added in text: line number 283-291 in bold " A 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (Traditional Exercise vs. Virtual Reality Exercise) and time (Pre vs. Post) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to analysis, Mauchly's test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly's test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. Main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. )." Additionally, we updated the caption for Table 2 : line number 308 in "Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA." We believe that these additions have clarified the statistical method used and addressed your concerns. The use of repeated-measures ANOVA is appropriate for our study design as it allows us to examine the effects of both exercise type and time, as well as their interaction, on our outcome measures. Reviewer Comment 7 • You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor, too, which is not the case as per the stats of the study. Correct this. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the reporting of vigor results. We appreciate your detailed attention. Upon re-evaluation of the statistical analysis, we corrected the manuscript to remove any references to significant changes in vigor. Action Taken: The updated text accurately reflects that the analysis did not indicate significant changes in vigor, according to the statistical results. The previous statement, "significant changes were observed in vigor," has been removed and replaced with " Exercise type had no significant changes on patient vigor ." This correction can be found in the revised manuscript in the Results section (line 132). We have made necessary revisions to ensure clarity and accuracy in reporting the findings. Thank you for helping us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 8 • Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. Response: Thank you for your suggestion regarding the reporting of participants' ages. We appreciate your attention to the details and your recommendations to enhance the precision of our demographic data. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to report participants' ages in months instead of years. Specifically, in the Results section, line 306, we have changed "15.6 ± 0.7 years" to "163.57 ± 41.58 months. This modification provides a more precise representation of the participants' ages and aligns with the best practices for reporting developmental data for adolescent populations. We believe that this change has improved the clarity and accuracy of our demographic information. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 9 • How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Response: Thank you for your insightful comments regarding the measurement of the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) readings. We appreciate your attention to methodological rigor. Action Taken: In the revised manuscript, we have clarified that three readings of the MAS were taken for each joint to ensure reliability and accuracy. To adhere to established practices in the literature, we calculated and used the mean of these readings in our analysis. This adjustment is reflected in the Methods section, specifically on line 278, where we now state that "The mean of three MAS readings was used for each joint assessment." We believe that this change enhances the validity of our findings and aligns our methodology with the standard practices in the field. Thank you for your valuable feedback, which has helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 10 • Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding Table 3. We appreciate your attention to the details and emphasize the importance of statistical significance in reporting the results. Action Taken: We updated Table 3 to include the significance levels (p-values) for all reported outcomes. This clarifies the statistical significance of the changes observed in the present study. Specifically, we have added p-values in the last column of Table 3, which can be found in the revised manuscript. Moreover, we have revised the text to ensure that any claims of significance are supported by the corresponding statistical outcomes, which enhances the transparency and rigor of our results, aligning our reporting with best practices in the literature. Thank you for your constructive suggestions, which helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 11 b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Reviewer Comment 12 • Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can refer to the present study or the current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding the use of personal pronouns in research writing. We agree that maintaining an objective tone is important in scientific communication. Action Taken: We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and made the following changes: Replaced "our study" with "the present study" the present study’ throughout the document. Changed, "we found" to "results exhibit" where applicable. Replaced "we suggest" with "the current study suggests" as appropriate. Removed all instances of "I" and "my" from the manuscript. These revisions can be found throughout the document, particularly in the Results section and Discussion section .We believe that these changes have improved the objectivity and professionalism of our writing, while maintaining clarity. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 13 • While acknowledging the limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the language used to discuss the potential benefits of Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE). We appreciate your emphasis on the importance of using cautious language, especially when addressing areas with mixed or inconclusive findings. Action Taken: In response to your comment, we have thoroughly revised the discussion section to incorporate a more nuanced and careful approach in describing the potential benefits of VRE. Specifically, we have: Emphasizing the need for further research by stating that while some findings suggest benefits, it is crucial to recognize that other studies present mixed results . This balanced perspective is vital for accurately conveying the current state of the literature. We acknowledge the limitations of our study in terms of the generalizability of the findings. We explicitly state that additional evidence is necessary to substantiate the claims made regarding VRE , ensuring that our conclusions are firmly grounded in the available data. Utilizing cautious phrases such as "may suggest" and "could potentially contribute" could potentially contribute’ instead of making definitive statements. For instance, we have replaced "VRE improves cognitive function" with "VRE may improve cognitive function," effectively communicating the tentative nature of our findings. We believe these changes enhance the rigor and credibility of our discussion, providing a more accurate representation of the potential benefits of VRE while also emphasizing the need for further research in this area. Thank you for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in improving the quality and integrity of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 14 If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the mechanisms through which VRE might exert its effects on various outcomes. Response: We appreciate your insightful comment regarding the potential mechanisms by which virtual reality exercises (VRE) may influence various outcomes. Your suggestion to deepen the exploration of these mechanisms in the discussion is highly valued. Action Taken: In response to your feedback, we have significantly expanded the discussion section to offer a more comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms underlying the effects of VRE. The specific revisions are as follows. Discussion of Engagement and Motivation : We elaborated on the role of VRE in enhancing participant engagement through immersive experiences, which can lead to increased motivation and adherence to exercise programs. For instance, we revised line 352 from "VRE can increase motivation" to "The immersive nature of VRE may lead to heightened motivation, which is essential for improving physical activity levels." Exploration of Cognitive Function : We have included a detailed discussion on how VRE may facilitate cognitive engagement by requiring participants to interact with dynamic environments. In line 360, we modified the text from "VRE may help cognitive function" to "VRE potentially stimulates cognitive function by challenging participants to make quick decisions and adapt to changing virtual scenarios." Highlighting Social Interaction Effects : We addressed the potential of VRE to promote social interaction and support, which could further enhance its effectiveness. In line 375, we revised the statement from "VRE can be done alone or with others" to "Engaging in VRE in a group setting may foster social bonds, providing psychological benefits that contribute to overall well-being." Consideration of Physiological Responses : Finally, we examined the physiological responses associated with exercise in a virtual environment, positing that increased heart rate and caloric expenditure may arise from the interactive nature of VRE. We updated line 385 from "VRE involves physical activity" to "The interactive features of VRE may elicit greater physiological arousal, potentially leading to enhanced cardiovascular benefits." These enhancements are reflected in the discussion section, particularly between lines 350 and 390, where we now present a well-rounded perspective on the mechanisms through which VRE may exert its effects on various outcomes. Incorporating these insights significantly strengthens the discussion and provides a more thorough understanding of the potential benefits of VRE. We are grateful for your valuable feedback, which has contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript . Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram , Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar 27 Nov 2024 Author Response Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting ... Continue reading Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting a more balanced view of results, particularly regarding memory, is crucial for accuracy and transparency. The abstract has been revised to reflect heterogeneous findings on memory, ensuring that it aligns with the overall outcomes of the study. Action Taken: The following statement was incorporated into the abstract (lines 33–37):’ Fourteen participants (42.9% female) were included in this analysis, and the results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance . " This modification ensures a comprehensive interpretation of the findings and prepares readers for the study's conclusions. Reviewer Comment 2: In the introduction section, emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP, highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Response: Thank you for your constructive feedback. To emphasize the novelty and significance of our investigation, we restructured the introduction to focus on the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). This modification highlights the research gap that our study addresses and underscores the unique contribution of our work to the field. Action Taken: The following passage was incorporated into the introduction (lines 71–78):’ This study represents a significant advancement in elucidating the relationship between acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive health, there remains a notable gap in our understanding of how a single bout of exercise affects cognitive function in this specific population. This study was motivated by a growing body of evidence suggesting that acute aerobic exercise positively influences cognitive function, mood, and memory in various populations. However, these effects remain relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, particularly those with CP. This gap underscores the need for targeted research to elucidate how acute exercise can be utilized to enhance cognitive outcomes in this vulnerable population . " This addition enhances the novelty of our study and elucidates how our research addresses a gap in the literature in accordance with the reviewer's recommendation. Reviewer Comment 3: Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Response: We acknowledge your comprehensive feedback regarding the structure of the Introduction. In accordance with your recommendation, we have restructured the introduction to initially address the gap in current knowledge concerning acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), subsequently transitioning to existing evidence on virtual reality (VR) as a modality for promoting physical activity. This revised organization enhances the clarity of the narrative and establishes a logical progression towards the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Action Taken: The introduction now commences with a discussion of the limited research on acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP, followed by a brief mention of VR's effectiveness of VR (Lines 96–103). " This study represents a significant advancement in understanding the impact of technology, specifically virtual reality (VR), on the well-being of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Although previous studies have established the benefits of regular physical activity in adults with CP, there is a paucity of data regarding the immediate effects of exercise, particularly on cognitive performance, in adolescents with CP. The objective of our randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the physiological and psychological effects of using the VirZoom VR exercise cycle with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. This study aimed to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affection, memory, and decision-making abilities. This research contributes valuable insights into a critical topic that has received limited attention in this specific population . " This reorganization provided a more coherent rationale for the study and more effectively established the context for the research question. Reviewer Comment 4 : Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. Response: We appreciate your recommendation. It is acknowledged that the term "psychophysiological outcomes" may not be familiar to all readers; therefore, a concise definition has been incorporated to enhance comprehension for a broader audience. Action Taken: The following definition has been incorporated (lines 53–56):’ Psychophysiological outcomes refer to the observable effects of psychological processes on the physiological functions of the body (8). Psychophysiology is the scientific study of how cognitive processes, emotional states, and behaviors influence physiological responses, including heart rate, blood pressure, hormone levels, and brain function (9). " This succinct definition ensures that all readers, irrespective of their expertise, comprehend this crucial term and its significance to this study. Reviewer Comment 5: In the methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Response: We acknowledge your feedback and concur that it is essential to emphasize the novelty of the VirZoom VRE system, particularly its application in adolescents with CP. The utilization of immersive VR technology in exercise interventions for this population represents a relatively nascent area of research, and we have elucidated this novelty more explicitly in the methodology section. Action Taken: We revised the methodology section to include the following statement (Lines 128–152):’ it is essential to emphasize the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in comparison to TE bikes, particularly within the context of adolescents with CP. Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increase physical activity and improve health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. By incorporating games that target specific muscle groups, movement patterns, and cognitive skills, we can tailor the exercise experience to align it with the individual rehabilitation objectives and interests of our participants. By emphasizing the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in this study, we underscore its potential to transform the delivery of physical activity interventions for adolescents with CP, ultimately leading to improved health outcomes and enhanced quality of life for this population. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system for our study is based on several rationales. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of physical activities that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research indicates that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation. Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants (31). Lastly, we aim to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention ." This explanation emphasizes the innovative nature of the intervention and its potential benefits, thereby elucidating the study's contribution to the field. Major Changes needed: a-In the result section, please make following changes. Response to Reviewer’s Comment We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to present demographic characteristics in a group-wise format. This change enhanced the clarity and comprehensibility of the participants’ data. Action Taken: We created a new Table 1 that presents the demographic characteristics for each group (TE, VRE) as well as for the total study population. The table is formatted as follows. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants (refer the below link) https://f1000research.s3.amazonaws.com/linked/685666.Table_1_Demographic_Characteristics_of_Participants.pdf This table enhances the presentation of demographic data and provides a clearer comparison between the groups in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. Reviewer Comment 6 • Mention the name of the statistical test that you have used in stats in Table-2. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the statistical analysis of our study. You are correct that we should have explicitly mentioned the statistical tests used for the results presented in Table 2. We appreciate your attention to detail and opportunity to clarify this important aspect of our methodology. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to include the specific statistical tests used for the analysis presented in Table 2. The statistical method has been added to the "Statistical analysis" section of the Methods and referenced in the table caption. Text added in text: line number 283-291 in bold " A 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (Traditional Exercise vs. Virtual Reality Exercise) and time (Pre vs. Post) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to analysis, Mauchly's test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly's test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. Main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. )." Additionally, we updated the caption for Table 2 : line number 308 in "Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA." We believe that these additions have clarified the statistical method used and addressed your concerns. The use of repeated-measures ANOVA is appropriate for our study design as it allows us to examine the effects of both exercise type and time, as well as their interaction, on our outcome measures. Reviewer Comment 7 • You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor, too, which is not the case as per the stats of the study. Correct this. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the reporting of vigor results. We appreciate your detailed attention. Upon re-evaluation of the statistical analysis, we corrected the manuscript to remove any references to significant changes in vigor. Action Taken: The updated text accurately reflects that the analysis did not indicate significant changes in vigor, according to the statistical results. The previous statement, "significant changes were observed in vigor," has been removed and replaced with " Exercise type had no significant changes on patient vigor ." This correction can be found in the revised manuscript in the Results section (line 132). We have made necessary revisions to ensure clarity and accuracy in reporting the findings. Thank you for helping us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 8 • Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. Response: Thank you for your suggestion regarding the reporting of participants' ages. We appreciate your attention to the details and your recommendations to enhance the precision of our demographic data. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to report participants' ages in months instead of years. Specifically, in the Results section, line 306, we have changed "15.6 ± 0.7 years" to "163.57 ± 41.58 months. This modification provides a more precise representation of the participants' ages and aligns with the best practices for reporting developmental data for adolescent populations. We believe that this change has improved the clarity and accuracy of our demographic information. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 9 • How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Response: Thank you for your insightful comments regarding the measurement of the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) readings. We appreciate your attention to methodological rigor. Action Taken: In the revised manuscript, we have clarified that three readings of the MAS were taken for each joint to ensure reliability and accuracy. To adhere to established practices in the literature, we calculated and used the mean of these readings in our analysis. This adjustment is reflected in the Methods section, specifically on line 278, where we now state that "The mean of three MAS readings was used for each joint assessment." We believe that this change enhances the validity of our findings and aligns our methodology with the standard practices in the field. Thank you for your valuable feedback, which has helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 10 • Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding Table 3. We appreciate your attention to the details and emphasize the importance of statistical significance in reporting the results. Action Taken: We updated Table 3 to include the significance levels (p-values) for all reported outcomes. This clarifies the statistical significance of the changes observed in the present study. Specifically, we have added p-values in the last column of Table 3, which can be found in the revised manuscript. Moreover, we have revised the text to ensure that any claims of significance are supported by the corresponding statistical outcomes, which enhances the transparency and rigor of our results, aligning our reporting with best practices in the literature. Thank you for your constructive suggestions, which helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 11 b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Reviewer Comment 12 • Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can refer to the present study or the current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding the use of personal pronouns in research writing. We agree that maintaining an objective tone is important in scientific communication. Action Taken: We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and made the following changes: Replaced "our study" with "the present study" the present study’ throughout the document. Changed, "we found" to "results exhibit" where applicable. Replaced "we suggest" with "the current study suggests" as appropriate. Removed all instances of "I" and "my" from the manuscript. These revisions can be found throughout the document, particularly in the Results section and Discussion section .We believe that these changes have improved the objectivity and professionalism of our writing, while maintaining clarity. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 13 • While acknowledging the limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the language used to discuss the potential benefits of Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE). We appreciate your emphasis on the importance of using cautious language, especially when addressing areas with mixed or inconclusive findings. Action Taken: In response to your comment, we have thoroughly revised the discussion section to incorporate a more nuanced and careful approach in describing the potential benefits of VRE. Specifically, we have: Emphasizing the need for further research by stating that while some findings suggest benefits, it is crucial to recognize that other studies present mixed results . This balanced perspective is vital for accurately conveying the current state of the literature. We acknowledge the limitations of our study in terms of the generalizability of the findings. We explicitly state that additional evidence is necessary to substantiate the claims made regarding VRE , ensuring that our conclusions are firmly grounded in the available data. Utilizing cautious phrases such as "may suggest" and "could potentially contribute" could potentially contribute’ instead of making definitive statements. For instance, we have replaced "VRE improves cognitive function" with "VRE may improve cognitive function," effectively communicating the tentative nature of our findings. We believe these changes enhance the rigor and credibility of our discussion, providing a more accurate representation of the potential benefits of VRE while also emphasizing the need for further research in this area. Thank you for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in improving the quality and integrity of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 14 If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the mechanisms through which VRE might exert its effects on various outcomes. Response: We appreciate your insightful comment regarding the potential mechanisms by which virtual reality exercises (VRE) may influence various outcomes. Your suggestion to deepen the exploration of these mechanisms in the discussion is highly valued. Action Taken: In response to your feedback, we have significantly expanded the discussion section to offer a more comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms underlying the effects of VRE. The specific revisions are as follows. Discussion of Engagement and Motivation : We elaborated on the role of VRE in enhancing participant engagement through immersive experiences, which can lead to increased motivation and adherence to exercise programs. For instance, we revised line 352 from "VRE can increase motivation" to "The immersive nature of VRE may lead to heightened motivation, which is essential for improving physical activity levels." Exploration of Cognitive Function : We have included a detailed discussion on how VRE may facilitate cognitive engagement by requiring participants to interact with dynamic environments. In line 360, we modified the text from "VRE may help cognitive function" to "VRE potentially stimulates cognitive function by challenging participants to make quick decisions and adapt to changing virtual scenarios." Highlighting Social Interaction Effects : We addressed the potential of VRE to promote social interaction and support, which could further enhance its effectiveness. In line 375, we revised the statement from "VRE can be done alone or with others" to "Engaging in VRE in a group setting may foster social bonds, providing psychological benefits that contribute to overall well-being." Consideration of Physiological Responses : Finally, we examined the physiological responses associated with exercise in a virtual environment, positing that increased heart rate and caloric expenditure may arise from the interactive nature of VRE. We updated line 385 from "VRE involves physical activity" to "The interactive features of VRE may elicit greater physiological arousal, potentially leading to enhanced cardiovascular benefits." These enhancements are reflected in the discussion section, particularly between lines 350 and 390, where we now present a well-rounded perspective on the mechanisms through which VRE may exert its effects on various outcomes. Incorporating these insights significantly strengthens the discussion and provides a more thorough understanding of the potential benefits of VRE. We are grateful for your valuable feedback, which has contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript . Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting a more balanced view of results, particularly regarding memory, is crucial for accuracy and transparency. The abstract has been revised to reflect heterogeneous findings on memory, ensuring that it aligns with the overall outcomes of the study. Action Taken: The following statement was incorporated into the abstract (lines 33–37):’ Fourteen participants (42.9% female) were included in this analysis, and the results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance . " This modification ensures a comprehensive interpretation of the findings and prepares readers for the study's conclusions. Reviewer Comment 2: In the introduction section, emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP, highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Response: Thank you for your constructive feedback. To emphasize the novelty and significance of our investigation, we restructured the introduction to focus on the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). This modification highlights the research gap that our study addresses and underscores the unique contribution of our work to the field. Action Taken: The following passage was incorporated into the introduction (lines 71–78):’ This study represents a significant advancement in elucidating the relationship between acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive health, there remains a notable gap in our understanding of how a single bout of exercise affects cognitive function in this specific population. This study was motivated by a growing body of evidence suggesting that acute aerobic exercise positively influences cognitive function, mood, and memory in various populations. However, these effects remain relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, particularly those with CP. This gap underscores the need for targeted research to elucidate how acute exercise can be utilized to enhance cognitive outcomes in this vulnerable population . " This addition enhances the novelty of our study and elucidates how our research addresses a gap in the literature in accordance with the reviewer's recommendation. Reviewer Comment 3: Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Response: We acknowledge your comprehensive feedback regarding the structure of the Introduction. In accordance with your recommendation, we have restructured the introduction to initially address the gap in current knowledge concerning acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), subsequently transitioning to existing evidence on virtual reality (VR) as a modality for promoting physical activity. This revised organization enhances the clarity of the narrative and establishes a logical progression towards the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Action Taken: The introduction now commences with a discussion of the limited research on acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP, followed by a brief mention of VR's effectiveness of VR (Lines 96–103). " This study represents a significant advancement in understanding the impact of technology, specifically virtual reality (VR), on the well-being of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Although previous studies have established the benefits of regular physical activity in adults with CP, there is a paucity of data regarding the immediate effects of exercise, particularly on cognitive performance, in adolescents with CP. The objective of our randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the physiological and psychological effects of using the VirZoom VR exercise cycle with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. This study aimed to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affection, memory, and decision-making abilities. This research contributes valuable insights into a critical topic that has received limited attention in this specific population . " This reorganization provided a more coherent rationale for the study and more effectively established the context for the research question. Reviewer Comment 4 : Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. Response: We appreciate your recommendation. It is acknowledged that the term "psychophysiological outcomes" may not be familiar to all readers; therefore, a concise definition has been incorporated to enhance comprehension for a broader audience. Action Taken: The following definition has been incorporated (lines 53–56):’ Psychophysiological outcomes refer to the observable effects of psychological processes on the physiological functions of the body (8). Psychophysiology is the scientific study of how cognitive processes, emotional states, and behaviors influence physiological responses, including heart rate, blood pressure, hormone levels, and brain function (9). " This succinct definition ensures that all readers, irrespective of their expertise, comprehend this crucial term and its significance to this study. Reviewer Comment 5: In the methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Response: We acknowledge your feedback and concur that it is essential to emphasize the novelty of the VirZoom VRE system, particularly its application in adolescents with CP. The utilization of immersive VR technology in exercise interventions for this population represents a relatively nascent area of research, and we have elucidated this novelty more explicitly in the methodology section. Action Taken: We revised the methodology section to include the following statement (Lines 128–152):’ it is essential to emphasize the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in comparison to TE bikes, particularly within the context of adolescents with CP. Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increase physical activity and improve health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. By incorporating games that target specific muscle groups, movement patterns, and cognitive skills, we can tailor the exercise experience to align it with the individual rehabilitation objectives and interests of our participants. By emphasizing the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in this study, we underscore its potential to transform the delivery of physical activity interventions for adolescents with CP, ultimately leading to improved health outcomes and enhanced quality of life for this population. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system for our study is based on several rationales. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of physical activities that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research indicates that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation. Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants (31). Lastly, we aim to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention ." This explanation emphasizes the innovative nature of the intervention and its potential benefits, thereby elucidating the study's contribution to the field. Major Changes needed: a-In the result section, please make following changes. Response to Reviewer’s Comment We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to present demographic characteristics in a group-wise format. This change enhanced the clarity and comprehensibility of the participants’ data. Action Taken: We created a new Table 1 that presents the demographic characteristics for each group (TE, VRE) as well as for the total study population. The table is formatted as follows. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants (refer the below link) https://f1000research.s3.amazonaws.com/linked/685666.Table_1_Demographic_Characteristics_of_Participants.pdf This table enhances the presentation of demographic data and provides a clearer comparison between the groups in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. Reviewer Comment 6 • Mention the name of the statistical test that you have used in stats in Table-2. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the statistical analysis of our study. You are correct that we should have explicitly mentioned the statistical tests used for the results presented in Table 2. We appreciate your attention to detail and opportunity to clarify this important aspect of our methodology. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to include the specific statistical tests used for the analysis presented in Table 2. The statistical method has been added to the "Statistical analysis" section of the Methods and referenced in the table caption. Text added in text: line number 283-291 in bold " A 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (Traditional Exercise vs. Virtual Reality Exercise) and time (Pre vs. Post) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to analysis, Mauchly's test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly's test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. Main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. )." Additionally, we updated the caption for Table 2 : line number 308 in "Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA." We believe that these additions have clarified the statistical method used and addressed your concerns. The use of repeated-measures ANOVA is appropriate for our study design as it allows us to examine the effects of both exercise type and time, as well as their interaction, on our outcome measures. Reviewer Comment 7 • You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor, too, which is not the case as per the stats of the study. Correct this. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the reporting of vigor results. We appreciate your detailed attention. Upon re-evaluation of the statistical analysis, we corrected the manuscript to remove any references to significant changes in vigor. Action Taken: The updated text accurately reflects that the analysis did not indicate significant changes in vigor, according to the statistical results. The previous statement, "significant changes were observed in vigor," has been removed and replaced with " Exercise type had no significant changes on patient vigor ." This correction can be found in the revised manuscript in the Results section (line 132). We have made necessary revisions to ensure clarity and accuracy in reporting the findings. Thank you for helping us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 8 • Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. Response: Thank you for your suggestion regarding the reporting of participants' ages. We appreciate your attention to the details and your recommendations to enhance the precision of our demographic data. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to report participants' ages in months instead of years. Specifically, in the Results section, line 306, we have changed "15.6 ± 0.7 years" to "163.57 ± 41.58 months. This modification provides a more precise representation of the participants' ages and aligns with the best practices for reporting developmental data for adolescent populations. We believe that this change has improved the clarity and accuracy of our demographic information. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 9 • How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Response: Thank you for your insightful comments regarding the measurement of the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) readings. We appreciate your attention to methodological rigor. Action Taken: In the revised manuscript, we have clarified that three readings of the MAS were taken for each joint to ensure reliability and accuracy. To adhere to established practices in the literature, we calculated and used the mean of these readings in our analysis. This adjustment is reflected in the Methods section, specifically on line 278, where we now state that "The mean of three MAS readings was used for each joint assessment." We believe that this change enhances the validity of our findings and aligns our methodology with the standard practices in the field. Thank you for your valuable feedback, which has helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 10 • Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding Table 3. We appreciate your attention to the details and emphasize the importance of statistical significance in reporting the results. Action Taken: We updated Table 3 to include the significance levels (p-values) for all reported outcomes. This clarifies the statistical significance of the changes observed in the present study. Specifically, we have added p-values in the last column of Table 3, which can be found in the revised manuscript. Moreover, we have revised the text to ensure that any claims of significance are supported by the corresponding statistical outcomes, which enhances the transparency and rigor of our results, aligning our reporting with best practices in the literature. Thank you for your constructive suggestions, which helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 11 b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Reviewer Comment 12 • Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can refer to the present study or the current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding the use of personal pronouns in research writing. We agree that maintaining an objective tone is important in scientific communication. Action Taken: We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and made the following changes: Replaced "our study" with "the present study" the present study’ throughout the document. Changed, "we found" to "results exhibit" where applicable. Replaced "we suggest" with "the current study suggests" as appropriate. Removed all instances of "I" and "my" from the manuscript. These revisions can be found throughout the document, particularly in the Results section and Discussion section .We believe that these changes have improved the objectivity and professionalism of our writing, while maintaining clarity. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 13 • While acknowledging the limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the language used to discuss the potential benefits of Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE). We appreciate your emphasis on the importance of using cautious language, especially when addressing areas with mixed or inconclusive findings. Action Taken: In response to your comment, we have thoroughly revised the discussion section to incorporate a more nuanced and careful approach in describing the potential benefits of VRE. Specifically, we have: Emphasizing the need for further research by stating that while some findings suggest benefits, it is crucial to recognize that other studies present mixed results . This balanced perspective is vital for accurately conveying the current state of the literature. We acknowledge the limitations of our study in terms of the generalizability of the findings. We explicitly state that additional evidence is necessary to substantiate the claims made regarding VRE , ensuring that our conclusions are firmly grounded in the available data. Utilizing cautious phrases such as "may suggest" and "could potentially contribute" could potentially contribute’ instead of making definitive statements. For instance, we have replaced "VRE improves cognitive function" with "VRE may improve cognitive function," effectively communicating the tentative nature of our findings. We believe these changes enhance the rigor and credibility of our discussion, providing a more accurate representation of the potential benefits of VRE while also emphasizing the need for further research in this area. Thank you for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in improving the quality and integrity of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 14 If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the mechanisms through which VRE might exert its effects on various outcomes. Response: We appreciate your insightful comment regarding the potential mechanisms by which virtual reality exercises (VRE) may influence various outcomes. Your suggestion to deepen the exploration of these mechanisms in the discussion is highly valued. Action Taken: In response to your feedback, we have significantly expanded the discussion section to offer a more comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms underlying the effects of VRE. The specific revisions are as follows. Discussion of Engagement and Motivation : We elaborated on the role of VRE in enhancing participant engagement through immersive experiences, which can lead to increased motivation and adherence to exercise programs. For instance, we revised line 352 from "VRE can increase motivation" to "The immersive nature of VRE may lead to heightened motivation, which is essential for improving physical activity levels." Exploration of Cognitive Function : We have included a detailed discussion on how VRE may facilitate cognitive engagement by requiring participants to interact with dynamic environments. In line 360, we modified the text from "VRE may help cognitive function" to "VRE potentially stimulates cognitive function by challenging participants to make quick decisions and adapt to changing virtual scenarios." Highlighting Social Interaction Effects : We addressed the potential of VRE to promote social interaction and support, which could further enhance its effectiveness. In line 375, we revised the statement from "VRE can be done alone or with others" to "Engaging in VRE in a group setting may foster social bonds, providing psychological benefits that contribute to overall well-being." Consideration of Physiological Responses : Finally, we examined the physiological responses associated with exercise in a virtual environment, positing that increased heart rate and caloric expenditure may arise from the interactive nature of VRE. We updated line 385 from "VRE involves physical activity" to "The interactive features of VRE may elicit greater physiological arousal, potentially leading to enhanced cardiovascular benefits." These enhancements are reflected in the discussion section, particularly between lines 350 and 390, where we now present a well-rounded perspective on the mechanisms through which VRE may exert its effects on various outcomes. Incorporating these insights significantly strengthens the discussion and provides a more thorough understanding of the potential benefits of VRE. We are grateful for your valuable feedback, which has contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript . Competing Interests: No competing interests Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 15 Dec 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 3 (revision) 18 Jul 25 read Version 2 (revision) 27 Nov 24 read read Version 1 15 Dec 23 read read Qamar Mahmood , Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan Hsiu-Ching Chiu , I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Taha Yassine Temlali , Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 11 Aug 2025 | for Version 3 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan 0 Views copyright © 2025 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Author has made useful changes in revision, so no further changes are needed from my side. Article can be accepted for indexing in current state. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Mahmood Q. Peer Review Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.183944.r399210) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3#referee-response-399210 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Temlali T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 17 Jan 2025 | for Version 2 Taha Yassine Temlali , Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 0 Views copyright © 2025 Temlali T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The article examines the effects of two cycling exercise methods—traditional cycling using a stationary bike with a TV-based virtual cycling video and immersive virtual reality exercise (VRE) using a VR headset—on acute cognitive outcomes, vigor, and muscle spasticity in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). The study contributes to the field by exploring the potential of VRE to enhance cognitive functions such as attention, vigor, and decision-making, with promising results suggesting VRE may outperform traditional cycling in these areas. The authors also provide valuable insights into how virtual environments can support physical activity in this population. However, several areas could be strengthened. Your manuscript would benefit from referencing existing literature to support the statements made throughout the paper. Several assertions are presented without citations, which weakens the overall credibility of your arguments. By integrating appropriate references, you would not only strengthen your claims but also clearly position your findings within the broader context of existing research, offering a stronger foundation for your conclusions. Additionally, it is important to report both significant and non-significant results accurately, as non-significant findings also contribute to the understanding of the topic. The message and argumentation in the paper could be made more cohesive. At the moment, some of the points seem disconnected and not fully developed. A more structured approach would help clarify the overall message and enhance the impact of your conclusions. A more focused argumentation would allow each point to contribute meaningfully, resulting in a stronger, well-supported narrative throughout the manuscript. In its current form, I believe the article can only be considered for indexing after major revisions, particularly in terms of strengthening the argumentation and ensuring clarity and proper citation of relevant research Please see the comments below: Introduction First, while VR is introduced as a promising tool for rehabilitation, the rationale for its application in CP rehabilitation could be further developed. Including details about how VR has been previously used in similar populations, such as individuals with other neurodevelopmental disorders, and identifying gaps in current use would provide a more robust foundation for the study. Specific examples of VR interventions in CP or related populations could also help underscore its potential impact on physical activity and rehabilitation. Additionally, expanding on why VR might be more effective or appealing than traditional exercise for individuals with CP would strengthen the argument. Clarification of the population under study is another area for improvement. The introduction mentions university students with CP but does not explain why this group is the focus. Is the choice motivated by unique challenges faced by this demographic, or is it due to a lack of research in this age group? This should be explicitly stated. Additionally, the term "university students" might imply young adults rather than adolescents. If the study targets a specific developmental stage, such as adolescents, this should be clarified to ensure relevance and accuracy in describing the population. The study’s novelty and relevance could be better emphasized. While the introduction mentions investigating acute effects of VR exercise, it does not explain why this focus is particularly important. Providing more context on the differences between acute and chronic exercise effects in CP would help justify this approach. Moreover, linking the study's findings to potential advancements in rehabilitation practices or future interventions would highlight its significance. For instance, how could this study build on or inform clinical practices or the development of VR technologies tailored to the needs of individuals with CP? Incorporating references to support claims about the innovative integration of VR in CP rehabilitation would further substantiate this argument. Key terms like Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE) and Traditional Exercise (TE) require clearer definitions. the study appears to inaccurately categorize one condition as "traditional cycling," despite incorporating a virtual component through a TV-based cycling video. This setup represents a basic virtual environment rather than a traditional exercise. Revising the terminology to accurately reflect the study design is crucial, and providing evidence from the literature to support the chosen terminology would strengthen the manuscript's credibility. The claim about the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system and studying acute effects could be enhanced by citing reviews or meta-analyses that emphasize the lack of VR-based interventions for adolescents with CP. Providing evidence that highlights this gap in the literature will make the argument more compelling and underscore the significance of the study. By addressing these areas, the introduction could provide a more comprehensive and compelling foundation for the study, ensuring clarity, proper contextualization, and stronger alignment with the study’s aims. Methods The methods section provides a detailed overview of the study design and procedures, but several areas lack references to substantiate key claims. Addressing these gaps with appropriate citations will enhance the credibility and robustness of the section. Please ensure that all variables assessed in this study are mentioned, along with the specific tests used for each of them. Game Selection and Rationale: The rationale for selecting specific games, which focus on immersive, interactive, and engaging experiences, needs to be backed by literature. Citing studies that explore the impact of such games on exercise adherence and participation in similar populations, particularly individuals with CP or other neurological conditions, would strengthen the argument for these choices. Furthermore, including references to guidelines or frameworks that highlight the criteria for selecting effective games (e.g., targeting specific muscle groups or promoting cognitive and social benefits) would validate the approach. Examples of lack of References for Key Claims: The text mentions the use of the VirZoom VRE system for cognitive stimulation, social interaction, and health outcomes but does not provide citations. Including studies or reviews that discuss these benefits in VR-based rehabilitation would establish credibility. General statements about the entertainment value of VR influencing exercise adherence and participation should be supported by research. Adding references to studies that demonstrate how entertainment and engagement impact adherence would make these assertions more persuasive. Customization and Rehabilitation Objectives: The statement regarding tailoring exercise experiences to individual rehabilitation objectives is an important point but would benefit from references to studies or examples that illustrate how customization in VR-based systems has been effective in rehabilitation contexts. Such evidence would demonstrate that the study’s approach aligns with best practices in the field. Analysis Assumption Testing No mention is made of other standard assumptions for ANOVA, such as normality and homogeneity of variances. Results Attention The reporting of results for attention lacks clarity and precision. The interaction effect is described as statistically significant (F(1,13)=6.30, p=0.026, ηp²=0.327), but these same values are also attributed to the main effect of exercise type, creating confusion about which effect is being discussed. Participants’ attention scores are stated to be higher in VRE compared to TE, but the actual means are missing, with only standard deviations provided, hindering a complete interpretation. Grammatical inconsistencies, such as the awkward phrasing "Participants’ mean response attention was higher," further obscure the findings and could be revised for clarity. The main effect of time (F(1,13)=97.066, p=0.001, ηp²=0.882) is reported as significant, but mean scores for pre- and post-training are absent. Additionally, the practical significance and implications of the findings, particularly the relationship between exercise type and attention, are not adequately explained, leaving their relevance unclear. Memory Several issues detract from the clarity of the memory results. The main effect of exercise type (F(1,13) = 3.059, p = 0.104, ηp² = 0.190) and the interaction effect (F(1,13) = 3.59, p = 0.104, ηp² = 0.190) are incorrectly described as statistically significant, despite a p-value of 0.104 not meeting the conventional significance threshold (p < 0.05). Misinterpreting p-values in this manner can mislead readers. The absence of mean scores for memory in the TE and VRE conditions further hinders the interpretation, as the claim that memory was higher in TE compared to VRE is unsupported by sufficient data; only standard deviations (SDs) are reported. The main effect of time (F(1,13) = 180.974, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.933) is validly described as significant, and it is the only result meeting significance criteria. Grammatical errors, such as "participants’ mean response memory were higher," should be corrected to "participants’ mean response memory was higher" to maintain proper subject-verb agreement. To improve readability, results should be reorganized into distinct paragraphs for main effects and interactions, explicitly stating which findings are significant and ensuring clarity in reporting. Total Score Several aspects of this section could be clarified to improve accuracy and readability. The interaction effect (F(1,13) = 19.118, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.595) is identical to the main effect of exercise type, suggesting a possible reporting error. Additionally, while standard deviations (SDs) for VRE and TE conditions are provided, the corresponding means are missing, limiting the ability to make meaningful comparisons. There is inconsistency in terminology, as the sentence "Descriptive statistics revealed that participants’ mean response attention was higher post-training" appears to incorrectly use "attention" instead of "total score." Furthermore, phrasing such as "Participants’ mean response total score were higher" should be revised for grammatical accuracy. To strengthen this section, it is essential to provide all key data points, including means, ensure precise terminology, and avoid redundancy in statistical reporting. Vigor The reporting of results for vigor is unclear and includes inaccuracies. Non-significant findings (F(1,13) = 2.576, p = 0.133, ηp² = 0.165) are described as meaningful, which is not true. Additionally, mean values are absent, and the provided standard deviations (SDs) are insufficient for meaningful comparisons. The term "statistically significant interaction" is incorrectly applied to a non-significant result (p = 0.133), further contributing to the inaccuracy. Decision-Making Correct While the significant main effect of exercise type (F(1,13) = 26.338, p = 0.01, ηp² = 0.670) is noted, the absence of mean values alongside SDs limits interpretability. The main effect of time (F(1,13) = 3.833, p = 0.72) is not significant but is misinterpreted as meaningful. Additionally, there is a labeling error where "mean response attention" is used instead of "decision-making," which needs correction. Consistent reporting of statistical values and terminology would clarify the findings. Decision-Making Errors Significant results (F(1,13) = 28.202, p = 0.001, ηp² = 0.684) are presented without accompanying means, making SD comparisons incomplete. While the main effect of time (F(1,13) = 5.350, p = 0.038, ηp² = 0.292) is accurately reported, missing data (e.g., pre- and post-training means) undermines clarity. MAS This section highlights reductions in spasticity for TE and VRE groups, but vague language like "more substantial improvements" detracts from objectivity. The lack of statistical results to support these claims leaves readers uncertain about their validity. Including consistent numerical data (means, SDs, and test statistics) would enhance the reliability and precision of this section. Overall, these sections would benefit from clear and consistent reporting of means, SDs, and test statistics, precise terminology, and a focus on significant findings to improve the clarity and accuracy of the reported results. Discussion Inaccurate or Unsubstantiated Statements The paragraph lacks clear connection between the findings from Neumann et al. and the results of your study. Specifically, the reference to Neumann et al. seems somewhat disconnected, as their conclusion about VR not always being optimal for diverting attention from exercise-related cues does not directly align with your claim that VRE improves attention. The phrasing also suggests that VR increases the likelihood of positive impact and satisfaction, but this claim could benefit from more specific evidence or examples to support it. Additionally, the paragraph could be more concise by avoiding repetition, particularly in the mention of "attentional mechanisms" which is emphasized multiple times without adding new information. The relationship between the attention measured in your study and the statement "By directing attention towards the virtual environment, VR systems can increase..." is unclear. It would be helpful to clarify how the attention outcomes observed in your study specifically link to the direction of attention in the virtual environment and how this contributes to increased attention and satisfaction. Lastly, the connection between VR and attentional mechanisms is somewhat vague—clarifying how VR specifically impacts attention in your study would strengthen the argument. Some statements in the text lack alignment with the study's scope or findings, leading to inaccuracies. For example, the claim that “Our findings that VRE may be more advantageous than normal exercise for enhancing decision-making accuracy is supported previous study. 47 Mestre et al . 47 compared indoor cycling exercise with VR feedback vs. non-VR feedback and highlighted that cycling exercise with VR feedback had a reduced perceived exertion and an increased level of enjoyment of PA” is not accurate. The referenced study (Mestre et al.) explores perceived exertion and enjoyment and not decision making accuracy, so how does that study support your finding of enhanced decision making accuracy? Such strong conclusions should be either removed or referenced properly with studies that actually support your exact findings. Similarly, the statement, “VRE immediately following PA might have a more favorable impact on attention than TE,” implies an effect that is not explicitly tested or supported by the methodology. To ensure accuracy, it would be better to clearly describe the timing of measurements and avoid speculative claims. Another example is the assertion, “These results emphasize the potential advantages of incorporating VRE as a promising intervention... to enhance the physical well-being and motor skills of individuals with CP.” Since the study focuses on cognitive outcomes rather than motor skills or physical well-being, this statement should be removed or revised to avoid unsupported claims. The suggestion that “VRE with bike provides visual and auditory stimulation... which may distract users and draw attention away from muscle sensations” is plausible but not substantiated by the study’s results. To maintain credibility, the discussion should focus on observed outcomes and refrain from over-interpreting mechanisms without evidence or reference studies supporting your arguments. Over-generalizations Several statements in the text overreach beyond the study’s findings. For instance, “Evidence suggests that there is a link between attention, memory, and vigor immediately after exercise” is not supported by references and is overly broad and not directly addressed in the study. It would be more appropriate to focus on the relationships explicitly tested and observed or backed up by evidence from literature . Questionable Interpretations of Results example:Some interpretations of the study’s results are inconsistent or unclear. For example, the memory scores are described in conflicting terms, with significant differences mentioned in one part and a lack of significant interaction between exercise type and time stated in another. These contradictions should be clarified by revisiting the statistical results and ensuring consistency. And by giving appropriate explanation for this. Defensive Tone in Limitations The section on retrospective registration comes across as overly defensive, which detracts from the objectivity of the discussion. Instead of justifying this limitation extensively, it would be more effective to briefly acknowledge the retrospective registration and highlight measures taken to mitigate potential bias. This approach ensures transparency without appearing overly apologetic. Lack of Alignment Between Findings and Conclusions Certain recommendations for future research do not align with the study’s scope. For instance, the suggestion to investigate the long-term effects of the activities is valid but not directly supported by the current study, which focuses on short-term outcomes. To maintain alignment, this recommendation should be framed as exploratory and emphasize directions based on the study’s findings. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My expertise lies in exercise physiology, exergames, and physical activity research. While I have a strong foundation in these areas, my experience with statistics is limited, and I do not specialize in statistical analysis I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Temlali TY. Peer Review Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r349413) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-349413 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 28 Nov 2024 | for Version 2 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan 0 Views copyright © 2024 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions I am well and fully satisfied with all the changes made by author in response to comments. I appreciate author 'efforts in this regard. So from my side, no further changes are required. This manuscript is ready to be indexed now. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 11 Sep 2025 Amine Ghram, Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar Dear Dr. Qamar Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to review the revised manuscript. I'm truly grateful for your thoughtful feedback throughout the process and your support in helping improve the quality of the paper. I’m pleased to hear that you are satisfied with the revisions. Warm regards, Amine Ghram View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests reply Respond Report a concern Mahmood Q. Peer Review Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.173736.r343915) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v2#referee-response-343915 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Chiu H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 30 May 2024 | for Version 1 Hsiu-Ching Chiu , I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 0 Views copyright © 2024 Chiu H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions General comments The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of published RCT paper to follow. Abstract. Not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Introduction-content Not read because method is very confusing. Methods: general -Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. -Randomization should be part of design, not separate paragraph. Methods: design Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes etc. Methods: Figure 1 Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Methods: participants -should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. -Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Methods: Intervention This is main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only 2 times training. Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristic of participants Results: Table 2 (missing).Differences between groups in all Outcomes across times Discussion and conclusion: Not read because method and results are very unstructured. Readability and style. This paper is not easy to read, because of unstructured and the fluency of English. For example, “….in adolescents with CP in North African college….” Not “In North African college adolescents with CP”. Another example, it may be clearer as “The Experimental group undertook xx …times a week for xx week….” Not “ Patients underwent two…” in the method. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? No Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? No Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My past research program was in understanding the relative contribution of motor impairments to activity limitation and participation in people with hemiplegic cerebral palsy (CP). I have finished one Cochrane review entitled as “Mechanically assisted walking training for walking, participation, and quality of life in children with cerebral palsy” for children with CP by examining outcomes across all domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram, Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar Reviewer Comment 1: The topic under investigation is interesting, but there are some fundamental problems, such as the design of intervention. Furthermore, authors should improve the format of the presentation, suggesting having an example of a published RCT paper to follow. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding our manuscript. We recognize the necessity for a more precise intervention design and consulted well-structured randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers to enhance the format and presentation of our work. Furthermore, we meticulously revised the intervention description to ensure adherence to the standard RCT formats. Action Taken: The intervention section has been revised to adhere to a more structured format commonly used in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This revision encompasses a clear delineation of the study design, intervention details, and outcome measures to enhance the methodological clarity and rigor. Reviewer Comment 2: Abstract not clear because of no information about the intervention such as weeks. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently revised the abstract to incorporate specific details regarding intervention duration, thereby ensuring comprehensive information about the study's structure for readers. Action Taken: The abstract now incorporates the following information (Lines 30–32): " The intervention consisted of a single 40-minute session of virtual reality exercise (VRE) compared to traditional exercise (TE), conducted in a controlled laboratory environment . " This addition provided essential details regarding the intervention and enhanced the comprehensiveness of the abstract. Reviewer Comment 3: Introduction not read because method is very confusing. Response: We acknowledge the ambiguity engendered by the initial organization of the methods section. To rectify this issue, we have restructured both the Introduction and Methods sections to enhance the clarity and logical progression. Action Taken: The Introduction has been revised to ensure enhanced alignment with the study's methodology and objectives. Furthermore, the Methods section provides a comprehensive, sequential explanation of the intervention and study design, thereby minimizing potential ambiguities. Reviewer Comment 4: Method: - Ethics considerations have been already mentioned in the design, so it would be unnecessary to repeat. - Randomization should be part of design, not a separate paragraph. Response: We would like to acknowledge this recommendation. Redundant ethical considerations were eliminated, and the randomization process was integrated into the study design section to enhance the coherence of the presentation. Action Taken: The randomization protocol has been relocated to the design section (lines 175–176), and superfluous ethical considerations have been eliminated to enhance conciseness and clarity. Reviewer Comment 5: Method: Even this study has been registered, authors still need to provide information about design, such as training and outcomes, etc. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have provided supplementary information concerning the study design, encompassing training protocols and specific outcomes. Action Taken: The Methods section now delineates the training regimen, outcome measures, and data collection processes, thereby ensuring that the study design is fully transparent and adheres to RCT guidelines. Reviewer Comment 6: Methods: Figure 1 - Authors should show how many weeks of intervention as well as a brief content for both groups. Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The intervention duration was clarified, and a concise description of the intervention for both groups was provided (Figure 1). Action Taken: Figure 1 demonstrates that the intervention was implemented as a single-session trial and a concise description of the intervention protocols for both groups was provided. Reviewer Comment 7: Methods: participants - Should use “Participants” to replace “Patients”. - Actual number of participants and characteristics should be in the results. Response: We agree with the reviewer's recommendations. The term "participants" has been substituted for "patients" throughout the manuscript, and the precise number of participants, along with their demographic characteristics, has been moved to the Results section. Action Taken: The term "patients" has been replaced with "participants" throughout the manuscript, and the characteristics of participants have been incorporated into the results section (Lines 301, Table 1). Reviewer Comment 8: Methods: Intervention - This is the main problem because it’s hard to believe it will be effective for only two times training. Response: This study has several limitations. While the present investigation focused on the immediate effects of a single session, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of repeated interventions. This limitation has been addressed in the Discussion section. Action Taken: This study acknowledges this limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate extended interventions to evaluate the cumulative effects of repeated VRE sessions. Reviewer Comment 9: Results: Table 1 (missing). Characteristics of participants. Response: We acknowledge your observation and have subsequently incorporated Table 1, which delineates the participants' characteristics including age, sex, and pertinent demographic data. Action Taken: Table 1 has been incorporated into the Results section, presenting the characteristics of the study participants as requested. Reviewer Comment 10: Results: Table 2 (missing). Differences between groups in all outcomes across times. Response: Table 2 presents the differences between the groups across all outcome measures and time points. Action Taken: Table 2 has been added to the Results section to show the differences in outcomes between the traditional exercise and VRE groups. Reviewer Comment 11: The discussion and conclusion have not been read because the method and results are unstructured. Response: The Methods and Results sections have been restructured to enhance the clarity and logical progression. The discussion has been aligned to provide a coherent narrative that establishes connections among the methods, results, and conclusions. Action Taken: The Methods, Results, and Discussion sections were restructured to enhance clarity, thereby improving the accessibility and logical organization of the manuscript. Reviewer Comment 12: This paper is not easy to read because of unstructured format and fluency of English. Response: The authors acknowledge concerns regarding readability and fluency. The manuscript has undergone a comprehensive revision to enhance both the structure and fluency of the English language, thereby ensuring a more lucid and professional presentation. Action Taken: The manuscript has undergone comprehensive revision to enhance clarity, grammatical accuracy, and overall fluency, thereby improving readability while maintaining scholarly rigor. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the clarity, structure, and scientific rigor of our manuscript. We look forward to your feedback, and hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests reply Respond Report a concern Chiu HC. Peer Review Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r237583) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-237583 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 29 Mar 2024 | for Version 1 Qamar Mahmood , Director, Physiotherapy Department, Institute of Medical Rehabilitation, Islamabad, Pakistan; Ex-HOD, Physical Therapy Department, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan; Professor of Physical Therapy, FRAHS, Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan 0 Views copyright © 2024 Mahmood Q. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This article investigated the immediate effects of virtual reality exercise (VRE) bike games on young adults in North Africa with cerebral palsy (CP). Its brief description is as under: Study Design: Randomized controlled trial (considered a gold standard for clinical research) Participants: 14 college students (average age 15.6) diagnosed with CP Intervention: Participants were divided into two groups. One group exercised using VR bike games for 40 minutes (VRE group), while the other group participated in traditional exercise (TE group) for the same duration. Outcomes: The study measured changes in attention, vigor (energy levels), and decision-making abilities after the exercise sessions. Key Findings: Compared to traditional exercise, VR exercise led to significant improvements in attention and vigor. Its Clinical Relevance: Cerebral palsy can impair both physical function and mental well-being. This study suggests VR exercise could be a valuable tool for improving cognitive function and motivation in young adults with CP. VR's engaging nature might make exercise more enjoyable and help individuals with CP adhere to exercise routines. However, it's important to note that the study only looked at short-term effects. More research is needed to confirm these findings and explore the long-term benefits of VR exercise for CP management. This article is well written, however following major and minor changes will improve its quality for publication. Minor Changes needed: In abstract section; Briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. In introduction section: Emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP , highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then, briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. In methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Briefly explain the rationale behind choosing specific games on the VirZoom VRE for the study. Major Changes needed: a- In result section, please make following changes. Demographic characteristics should be presented as group wise. Because you have two groups, therefore, split age, gender etc. group wise. You can make three groups as TE, VRE and Total study population too. Mention the name of statistical test which you have used in stats of Table-2. You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor too which is not the case as per stats of the study. Correct this. Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can say present study or current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. While acknowledging limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the possible mechanisms by which VRE might be exerting its effects on various outcomes. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Pediatric rehabilitation specifically in the management of Cerebral Palsy, Physical therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 27 Nov 2024 Amine Ghram, Cardiac Rehabilitation, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, 3050, Qatar Reviewer Comment 1: In the Abstract section, briefly mention the mixed findings on memory to provide a more balanced picture of the results. Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Presenting a more balanced view of results, particularly regarding memory, is crucial for accuracy and transparency. The abstract has been revised to reflect heterogeneous findings on memory, ensuring that it aligns with the overall outcomes of the study. Action Taken: The following statement was incorporated into the abstract (lines 33–37):’ Fourteen participants (42.9% female) were included in this analysis, and the results indicated that VRE had a statistically significant positive effect on attention and vigor compared to TE. While participants in the VRE group exhibited enhanced attention levels and reported elevated levels of vigor subsequent to the exercise sessions, the memory results did not reach statistical significance . " This modification ensures a comprehensive interpretation of the findings and prepares readers for the study's conclusions. Reviewer Comment 2: In the introduction section, emphasize the novelty and significance of the present study. Instead of stating existing knowledge about the benefits of regular exercise, briefly mention the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with CP, highlighting the gap your study aims to address. Response: Thank you for your constructive feedback. To emphasize the novelty and significance of our investigation, we restructured the introduction to focus on the limited research on the effects of acute exercise on cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). This modification highlights the research gap that our study addresses and underscores the unique contribution of our work to the field. Action Taken: The following passage was incorporated into the introduction (lines 71–78):’ This study represents a significant advancement in elucidating the relationship between acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of regular exercise on cognitive health, there remains a notable gap in our understanding of how a single bout of exercise affects cognitive function in this specific population. This study was motivated by a growing body of evidence suggesting that acute aerobic exercise positively influences cognitive function, mood, and memory in various populations. However, these effects remain relatively unexplored in children and adolescents, particularly those with CP. This gap underscores the need for targeted research to elucidate how acute exercise can be utilized to enhance cognitive outcomes in this vulnerable population . " This addition enhances the novelty of our study and elucidates how our research addresses a gap in the literature in accordance with the reviewer's recommendation. Reviewer Comment 3: Consider reorganizing the information flow. Start by highlighting the gap in knowledge about acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP. Then briefly mention the existing evidence of VR's effectiveness in promoting physical activity, leading to the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Response: We acknowledge your comprehensive feedback regarding the structure of the Introduction. In accordance with your recommendation, we have restructured the introduction to initially address the gap in current knowledge concerning acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), subsequently transitioning to existing evidence on virtual reality (VR) as a modality for promoting physical activity. This revised organization enhances the clarity of the narrative and establishes a logical progression towards the introduction of the VirZoom VRE bike and the research question. Action Taken: The introduction now commences with a discussion of the limited research on acute exercise and cognitive function in adolescents with CP, followed by a brief mention of VR's effectiveness of VR (Lines 96–103). " This study represents a significant advancement in understanding the impact of technology, specifically virtual reality (VR), on the well-being of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Although previous studies have established the benefits of regular physical activity in adults with CP, there is a paucity of data regarding the immediate effects of exercise, particularly on cognitive performance, in adolescents with CP. The objective of our randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare the physiological and psychological effects of using the VirZoom VR exercise cycle with traditional exercise (TE) bicycles among university students with CP in North Africa. This study aimed to examine the impact of acute exercise on cognitive function, affection, memory, and decision-making abilities. This research contributes valuable insights into a critical topic that has received limited attention in this specific population . " This reorganization provided a more coherent rationale for the study and more effectively established the context for the research question. Reviewer Comment 4 : Briefly define psychophysiological outcomes for the audience unfamiliar with these terms. Response: We appreciate your recommendation. It is acknowledged that the term "psychophysiological outcomes" may not be familiar to all readers; therefore, a concise definition has been incorporated to enhance comprehension for a broader audience. Action Taken: The following definition has been incorporated (lines 53–56):’ Psychophysiological outcomes refer to the observable effects of psychological processes on the physiological functions of the body (8). Psychophysiology is the scientific study of how cognitive processes, emotional states, and behaviors influence physiological responses, including heart rate, blood pressure, hormone levels, and brain function (9). " This succinct definition ensures that all readers, irrespective of their expertise, comprehend this crucial term and its significance to this study. Reviewer Comment 5: In the methodology section: Further emphasize the novelty of using VirZoom VRE compared to traditional exercise bikes in this specific population (adolescents with CP). Response: We acknowledge your feedback and concur that it is essential to emphasize the novelty of the VirZoom VRE system, particularly its application in adolescents with CP. The utilization of immersive VR technology in exercise interventions for this population represents a relatively nascent area of research, and we have elucidated this novelty more explicitly in the methodology section. Action Taken: We revised the methodology section to include the following statement (Lines 128–152):’ it is essential to emphasize the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in comparison to TE bikes, particularly within the context of adolescents with CP. Although TE bikes have been utilized in numerous rehabilitation settings, the integration of VR technology represents an innovative approach to increase physical activity and improve health outcomes in this specific population. The VirZoom VRE system provides a unique and immersive fitness experience that transcends the limitations of conventional stationary cycles by offering users dynamic virtual environments to explore during exercises. This novel approach not only introduces an element of enjoyment and engagement in the training program, but also presents opportunities for cognitive stimulation and social interaction, which are particularly beneficial for adolescents with CP. Furthermore, the VirZoom VRE system enables customizable training protocols and game-based activities to address the diverse needs and abilities of individuals with CP. By incorporating games that target specific muscle groups, movement patterns, and cognitive skills, we can tailor the exercise experience to align it with the individual rehabilitation objectives and interests of our participants. By emphasizing the novelty of implementing the VirZoom VRE system in this study, we underscore its potential to transform the delivery of physical activity interventions for adolescents with CP, ultimately leading to improved health outcomes and enhanced quality of life for this population. The selection of specific games in the VirZoom VRE system for our study is based on several rationales. Primarily, we aimed to ensure that the chosen games offered a diverse range of physical activities that engaged various muscle groups and movement patterns, addressing the heterogeneous needs and abilities of adolescents with CP. Second, we prioritized games that are immersive, interactive, and engaging, as research indicates that the entertainment value of VR experiences can significantly influence exercise adherence and participation. Additionally, we considered the cognitive demands of each game, selecting those that incorporated elements of attention, memory, decision-making, and problem solving to potentially enhance cognitive outcomes in our participants (31). Lastly, we aim to incorporate games that facilitate social interaction and competition, fostering a sense of camaraderie and motivation among participants, which may further contribute to the efficacy of the intervention ." This explanation emphasizes the innovative nature of the intervention and its potential benefits, thereby elucidating the study's contribution to the field. Major Changes needed: a-In the result section, please make following changes. Response to Reviewer’s Comment We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to present demographic characteristics in a group-wise format. This change enhanced the clarity and comprehensibility of the participants’ data. Action Taken: We created a new Table 1 that presents the demographic characteristics for each group (TE, VRE) as well as for the total study population. The table is formatted as follows. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants (refer the below link) https://f1000research.s3.amazonaws.com/linked/685666.Table_1_Demographic_Characteristics_of_Participants.pdf This table enhances the presentation of demographic data and provides a clearer comparison between the groups in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. Reviewer Comment 6 • Mention the name of the statistical test that you have used in stats in Table-2. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the statistical analysis of our study. You are correct that we should have explicitly mentioned the statistical tests used for the results presented in Table 2. We appreciate your attention to detail and opportunity to clarify this important aspect of our methodology. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to include the specific statistical tests used for the analysis presented in Table 2. The statistical method has been added to the "Statistical analysis" section of the Methods and referenced in the table caption. Text added in text: line number 283-291 in bold " A 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of exercise type (Traditional Exercise vs. Virtual Reality Exercise) and time (Pre vs. Post) on performance scores. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0. Prior to analysis, Mauchly's test of sphericity was performed to assess the assumption of sphericity. If Mauchly's test was significant, indicating a violation of sphericity, the degrees of freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections, as appropriate. Main effects and interactions were evaluated, and post hoc tests were conducted using the Bonferroni correction to further explore the significant effects. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each condition, were calculated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the data. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of .05 for all analyses. )." Additionally, we updated the caption for Table 2 : line number 308 in "Table 2. Comparison of pre- and post-training scores for attention, memory, total score, vigor, correct decision making, and decision-making errors in both the TE and VRE training conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA." We believe that these additions have clarified the statistical method used and addressed your concerns. The use of repeated-measures ANOVA is appropriate for our study design as it allows us to examine the effects of both exercise type and time, as well as their interaction, on our outcome measures. Reviewer Comment 7 • You have mentioned that significant changes took place in Vigor, too, which is not the case as per the stats of the study. Correct this. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the reporting of vigor results. We appreciate your detailed attention. Upon re-evaluation of the statistical analysis, we corrected the manuscript to remove any references to significant changes in vigor. Action Taken: The updated text accurately reflects that the analysis did not indicate significant changes in vigor, according to the statistical results. The previous statement, "significant changes were observed in vigor," has been removed and replaced with " Exercise type had no significant changes on patient vigor ." This correction can be found in the revised manuscript in the Results section (line 132). We have made necessary revisions to ensure clarity and accuracy in reporting the findings. Thank you for helping us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 8 • Mention the age in months instead of years because it sounds better. Response: Thank you for your suggestion regarding the reporting of participants' ages. We appreciate your attention to the details and your recommendations to enhance the precision of our demographic data. Action Taken: We have revised the manuscript to report participants' ages in months instead of years. Specifically, in the Results section, line 306, we have changed "15.6 ± 0.7 years" to "163.57 ± 41.58 months. This modification provides a more precise representation of the participants' ages and aligns with the best practices for reporting developmental data for adolescent populations. We believe that this change has improved the clarity and accuracy of our demographic information. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 9 • How many readings of MAS were taken on a particular joint? Why have you not used the mean of readings for MAS which is established practice in literature? Response: Thank you for your insightful comments regarding the measurement of the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) readings. We appreciate your attention to methodological rigor. Action Taken: In the revised manuscript, we have clarified that three readings of the MAS were taken for each joint to ensure reliability and accuracy. To adhere to established practices in the literature, we calculated and used the mean of these readings in our analysis. This adjustment is reflected in the Methods section, specifically on line 278, where we now state that "The mean of three MAS readings was used for each joint assessment." We believe that this change enhances the validity of our findings and aligns our methodology with the standard practices in the field. Thank you for your valuable feedback, which has helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 10 • Table -3 lacks the significance level (p value). Where is it? In absence of statistical significance, how can you claim that changes are significant? Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding Table 3. We appreciate your attention to the details and emphasize the importance of statistical significance in reporting the results. Action Taken: We updated Table 3 to include the significance levels (p-values) for all reported outcomes. This clarifies the statistical significance of the changes observed in the present study. Specifically, we have added p-values in the last column of Table 3, which can be found in the revised manuscript. Moreover, we have revised the text to ensure that any claims of significance are supported by the corresponding statistical outcomes, which enhances the transparency and rigor of our results, aligning our reporting with best practices in the literature. Thank you for your constructive suggestions, which helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 11 b-In discussion section; please make following changes. Reviewer Comment 12 • Don’t use the words our, I, my in research writings. Instead of our study, you can refer to the present study or the current study. Similarly instead of we found, you can write, results exhibits etc. Response: We appreciate your feedback regarding the use of personal pronouns in research writing. We agree that maintaining an objective tone is important in scientific communication. Action Taken: We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and made the following changes: Replaced "our study" with "the present study" the present study’ throughout the document. Changed, "we found" to "results exhibit" where applicable. Replaced "we suggest" with "the current study suggests" as appropriate. Removed all instances of "I" and "my" from the manuscript. These revisions can be found throughout the document, particularly in the Results section and Discussion section .We believe that these changes have improved the objectivity and professionalism of our writing, while maintaining clarity. Thank you for helping us enhance the quality of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 13 • While acknowledging the limitations, the discussion could be strengthened by using more cautious language when describing the potential benefits of VRE, especially in areas where the findings are mixed or inconclusive. Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the language used to discuss the potential benefits of Virtual Reality Exercise (VRE). We appreciate your emphasis on the importance of using cautious language, especially when addressing areas with mixed or inconclusive findings. Action Taken: In response to your comment, we have thoroughly revised the discussion section to incorporate a more nuanced and careful approach in describing the potential benefits of VRE. Specifically, we have: Emphasizing the need for further research by stating that while some findings suggest benefits, it is crucial to recognize that other studies present mixed results . This balanced perspective is vital for accurately conveying the current state of the literature. We acknowledge the limitations of our study in terms of the generalizability of the findings. We explicitly state that additional evidence is necessary to substantiate the claims made regarding VRE , ensuring that our conclusions are firmly grounded in the available data. Utilizing cautious phrases such as "may suggest" and "could potentially contribute" could potentially contribute’ instead of making definitive statements. For instance, we have replaced "VRE improves cognitive function" with "VRE may improve cognitive function," effectively communicating the tentative nature of our findings. We believe these changes enhance the rigor and credibility of our discussion, providing a more accurate representation of the potential benefits of VRE while also emphasizing the need for further research in this area. Thank you for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in improving the quality and integrity of our manuscript. Reviewer Comment 14 If possible, the discussion could be strengthened by delving deeper into the mechanisms through which VRE might exert its effects on various outcomes. Response: We appreciate your insightful comment regarding the potential mechanisms by which virtual reality exercises (VRE) may influence various outcomes. Your suggestion to deepen the exploration of these mechanisms in the discussion is highly valued. Action Taken: In response to your feedback, we have significantly expanded the discussion section to offer a more comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms underlying the effects of VRE. The specific revisions are as follows. Discussion of Engagement and Motivation : We elaborated on the role of VRE in enhancing participant engagement through immersive experiences, which can lead to increased motivation and adherence to exercise programs. For instance, we revised line 352 from "VRE can increase motivation" to "The immersive nature of VRE may lead to heightened motivation, which is essential for improving physical activity levels." Exploration of Cognitive Function : We have included a detailed discussion on how VRE may facilitate cognitive engagement by requiring participants to interact with dynamic environments. In line 360, we modified the text from "VRE may help cognitive function" to "VRE potentially stimulates cognitive function by challenging participants to make quick decisions and adapt to changing virtual scenarios." Highlighting Social Interaction Effects : We addressed the potential of VRE to promote social interaction and support, which could further enhance its effectiveness. In line 375, we revised the statement from "VRE can be done alone or with others" to "Engaging in VRE in a group setting may foster social bonds, providing psychological benefits that contribute to overall well-being." Consideration of Physiological Responses : Finally, we examined the physiological responses associated with exercise in a virtual environment, positing that increased heart rate and caloric expenditure may arise from the interactive nature of VRE. We updated line 385 from "VRE involves physical activity" to "The interactive features of VRE may elicit greater physiological arousal, potentially leading to enhanced cardiovascular benefits." These enhancements are reflected in the discussion section, particularly between lines 350 and 390, where we now present a well-rounded perspective on the mechanisms through which VRE may exert its effects on various outcomes. Incorporating these insights significantly strengthens the discussion and provides a more thorough understanding of the potential benefits of VRE. We are grateful for your valuable feedback, which has contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript . View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests reply Respond Report a concern Mahmood Q. Peer Review Report For: Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 12 :1597 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156823.r248808) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v1#referee-response-248808 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Acute effects of virtual reality exercise...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Soudani M et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597", templates : { twitter : "Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological.... Soudani M et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1597/v3" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/143189/183944") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "183944"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "243587": 0, "280196": 0, "243586": 0, "280197": 0, "243585": 0, "237569": 0, "243584": 0, "280192": 0, "237574": 0, "280193": 0, "243589": 0, "237573": 0, "280194": 0, "237572": 0, "280195": 0, "237578": 0, "237583": 21, "237580": 0, "237586": 0, "237585": 0, "237584": 0, "237589": 0, "262049": 0, "262054": 0, "262059": 0, "262058": 0, "262057": 0, "262056": 0, "262062": 0, "262061": 0, "262060": 0, "262064": 0, "271044": 0, "271045": 0, "344135": 0, "271046": 0, "344134": 0, "271047": 0, "271041": 0, "271042": 0, "271043": 0, "344141": 0, "344140": 0, "344143": 0, "344142": 0, "344137": 0, "271048": 0, "344136": 0, "271049": 0, "344139": 0, "271050": 0, "344138": 0, "349413": 18, "349412": 0, "349415": 0, "349414": 0, "349409": 0, "349408": 0, "248806": 0, "349411": 0, "349410": 0, "231787": 0, "248810": 0, "248808": 43, "349417": 0, "248815": 0, "399210": 12, "349416": 0, "231790": 0, "248814": 0, "343915": 17, "231789": 0, "399208": 0, "343914": 0, "231788": 0, "248812": 0, "399209": 0, "248818": 0, "248817": 0, "248816": 0, "248820": 0, "243579": 0, "280189": 0, "280190": 0, "280191": 0, "243583": 0, "243582": 0, "243581": 0, "243580": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "f40f3100-6804-428f-a95c-dadc4a85fcd9"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });