PGPH-D-21-00231 HEALTH SYSTEM CAPACITY AND READINESS FOR DELIVERY OF INTEGRATED NON-COMMUNICABLE DISEASE SERVICES IN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ETHIOPIAN EXPERIENCE PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Tesema,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 16 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: 

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

 

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Fawad Rasool

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

********** 

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

********** 

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

********** 

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

********** 

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: There are only two notes for minor revision:

A- In the abstract method, the sentence “in two regions and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia” after two regions, the “and” does not make sense.

B- In the main method body, study settings section, please clarify “woredas” as it is not an English word.

1. The study presents the results of the original research.

Yes, as it was shown throughout the article, the originality of the research. Plus, it has not been published elsewhere.

2. Results reported have not been published elsewhere.

Yes, it was selective and a new publication.

3. Experiments, statistics, and other analyses are performed to a high technical standard and are described in sufficient detail.

The analysis was qualitative with 22 participants. The 22 participants required details were present. Also, the details of the experiments are informative.

4. Conclusions are presented in an appropriate fashion and are supported by the data.

The conclusion is informative and thorough.

5. The article is presented in an intelligible fashion and is written in standard English.

Please fix the following:

1- In the abstract method, the sentence “in two regions and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia” after two regions, the “and” does not make sense.

2- In the method main body, study settings section; please clarify “woredas” as it is not an English word

6. The research meets all applicable standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity.

Yes, the authors not only provide approval from their local area where the study was conducted but also from Australia.

The committee board and approval number: National

Research and Research Ethics

office under the

Ethiopian Public Health

Institute (EPHI-IRB-194-2019) The committee board and approval number:: The

University of New

South Wales (UNSW)

Human Research Ethics Committee

(HC190014)

7. The article adheres to appropriate reporting guidelines and community standards for data availability.

Yes, the authors had followed the available guidelines and made the data available upon request.

Reviewer #2: To me although there is some needs to know more about the Ethiopian heath numerical indicators to understand the essentiality of the study and the burden of NCD in the country but the research well designed and has value to study. also I expect to get the answers for three main objectives more typically in the conclusion.

********** 

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Aliah Aldahash

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

HEALTH SYSTEM CAPACITY AND READINESS FOR DELIVERY OF INTEGRATED NON-COMMUNICABLE DISEASE SERVICES IN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ETHIOPIAN EXPERIENCE

PGPH-D-21-00231R1

Dear Dr. Tesema,

We're pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you'll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you'll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact globalpubhealth@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Fawad Rasool

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: