Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJanuary 24, 2020
Decision Letter - Sakamuri V. Reddy, Editor

PONE-D-20-02256

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PREOPERATIVE LEVELS OF 25-HYDROXYVITAMIN D AND HOSPITAL-ACQUIRED INFECTIONS AFTER HEPATOBILIARY SURGERY.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dra Laviano,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised both at the editorial level and a reviewer  comments as noted below during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Apr 06 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

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

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dr. Sakamuri V. Reddy

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

The authors have analyzed a large cohort of 301 patient population to evaluate the association between the levels of 25-OH vitamin D and hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) after hepatobiliary surgery. Specific comments and suggestions to further improve the manuscript are as follow. 1. Abstract- They have noted Discussion at the end, which needs to be replaced with “Conclusions” of the study. 2. (p.6; lines 133-139) delete the ‘title’ of the manuscript here. Also, given the previous studies in the field, the information provided “Introduction” needs to be detailed with more citations. Methods- clarify the statement that the study with patient population is approved with institutional IRB. Also, note separately a section of the “Statistical analysis” of the results. Also, note a separate paragraph on ‘vitamin D’ assays used to consider deficiency as per the American Endocrine Society guidelines (ex., citation #7) in Methods. Results- please provide a clear rationale of the study undertaken given other workers findings on the subject in the field.3. p.18; line 353-Remove citation name “Youssef et al” as it belongs only to citation #20, but it is noted as citations 6,17,20. Figure.1&2 embedded in the text are fine but seems repeated providing eps version again at the end after the References. Provide more details in the legends. I suggest the authors to follow journal article for style.

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. Since the requirement for written informed consent was waived by the ethics committee, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data collected in this study were fully anonymized before you accessed them.

3. In your Methods section, please provide additional information about the participant recruitment method and the demographic details of your participants. Please ensure you have provided sufficient details to replicate the analyses such as: a) the recruitment date range (month and year), b) a description of any inclusion/exclusion criteria that were applied to participant recruitment, c) a description of how participants were recruited, and d) descriptions of where participants were recruited and where the research took place.

4. At this time, we ask that you please provide additional informatino in your Methods section about the methodology used to conduct the chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) to measure vitamin D concentrations in the patients serum samples.

5. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

"NO"

  1. Please provide an amended Funding Statement that declares *all* the funding or sources of support received during this specific study (whether external or internal to your organization) as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now.  
  2. Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funder. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

6. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 

"NO"

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

7. Please amend your list of authors on the manuscript to ensure that each author is linked to an affiliation. Authors’ affiliations should reflect the institution where the work was done (if authors moved subsequently, you can also list the new affiliation stating “current affiliation:….” as necessary).

8. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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

**********

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: This manuscript by Laviano et al. describes a significant link between preoperative Vitamin-D levels and the increased chance of developing nosocomial infections in patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery. In general this manuscript is very well-written, easy to follow and its statistical analyses are pretty complete. I would only suggests a few minor additions to the text.

1) In line 161 authors refer previous studies similar to the submitted manuscript. It would be good to have a short explanation stating how this work in different to those.

2) In the legend of the first table the meaning of the abbreviations (ASA, COPD) is not included.

3) Better explanation of how the percentiles in table 1 were calculated is needed.

4) In line 235 authors mentioned Score II, but never mentioned this score in the manuscript. A brief explanation of what this means and why it is relevant to this work will be helpful to follow the manuscript.

5) In the third paragraph of the discussion is mentioned that other studies suggest a link between vit-D levels and heart disease. But this study does not observe statistical significance here. A possible reason for the different results should be included. Also the 4th paragraph of the discussion refers to 3rd paragraph (line 365) so the new paragraph is not really needed.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: 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 to be viewed.]

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 us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

Reviewer comments:

1. In line 161 authors refer previous studies similar to the submitted manuscript. It would be good to have a short explanation stating how this work in different to those.

A short explanation describing how this study differs to those previously published has been added to the revised manuscript.

2. In the legend of the first table the meaning of the abbreviations (ASA, COPD) is not included.

The legend of Table 1 has been edited to include the meanings of each of the abbreviations used.

3. Better explanation of how the percentiles in table 1 were calculated is needed.

Further information has been added to describe the process of calculating the percentiles.

4. In line 235 authors mentioned Score II, but never mentioned this score in the manuscript. A brief explanation of what this means and why it is relevant to this work will be helpful to follow the manuscript.

Score II refers to the ASA index score. This information is now included in the methods section.

5. In the third paragraph of the discussion is mentioned that other studies suggest a link between vit-D levels and heart disease. But this study does not observe statistical significance here. A possible reason for the different results should be included. Also the 4th paragraph of the discussion refers to 3rd paragraph (line 365) so the new paragraph is not really needed.

We have corrected the third and the fourth paragraphs of the discussion. We were unable to detect an association between cardiovascular disease and vitamin D levels due to the sample size, sample population, and study design.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Sakamuri V. Reddy, Editor

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PREOPERATIVE LEVELS OF 25-HYDROXYVITAMIN D AND HOSPITAL-ACQUIRED INFECTIONS AFTER HEPATOBILIARY SURGERY:  A PROSPECTIVE STUDY IN A THIRD-LEVEL HOSPITAL

PONE-D-20-02256R1

Dear Dr. Laviano,

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

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. 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 enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and 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 onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Sakamuri V. Reddy, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Sakamuri V. Reddy, Editor

PONE-D-20-02256R1

Association between preoperative levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and hospital-acquired infections after hepatobiliary surgery: A prospective study in a third-level hospital

Dear Dr. Laviano:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sakamuri V. Reddy

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .