PONE-D-20-31483

Risk factors for mortality of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients in two centers of Hubei province, China: a retrospective analysis

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zhang

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 during the review process.

The following reviews were submitted by external reviewers and the consensus was that this manuscript is requires minor revisions. Please respond ti the reviewers' comments as noted below and submit a revised manuscript in the form as outlined buy PLoS One editorial office. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. 

Reviewer 1 - ACADEMIC EDITOR: Love the paper and like the information but could really benefit from a native English speaker edit

----

Line 27--We aim to is awkward-- We analyzed

Line 43- Use standard abbreviation for hemoglobin (Hb) of (Hgb). 

Line 65- I think you should just change dissimilarity to homology. I thin you misinterpreted the original 'Notably, 2019-nCoV was closely related (with 88% identity) to two bat-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-like coronaviruses, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21, collected in 2018 in Zhoushan, eastern China, but were more distant from SARS-CoV (about 79%) and MERS-CoV (about 50%).'

Line 80- the tense is odd..Instead of We tried. ...We provide

these things continue but as above-just a good edit

Line 118. is it CK or CK-MB?  Would also include normal ranges for all measurements

Reviewer 2 Comments

Zhang et al. report clinical characteristics of 432 COVID-19 patients from two hospitals in Wuhan, China. The authors stratify their analyses by survivors (n=410) and non-survivors(n=22). Using multivariate Cox regression analyses, the authors determined that hemoglobin, creatine kinase-MB, lactate dehydrogenase and procalcitonin levels are predictors of COVID-19 mortality. This is consistent with similar published reports. Small number of non-survivors group is a limitation of the study, not acknowledged in discussion. Nonetheless, the data on the survivors group is informative and worth publishing. Typically, predictive models using the identified risk factors are presented in these studies (reviewer does not think this is needed for acceptance, but that would be helpful). Authors should address the following:

1. Please provide details on laboratory testing methodologies (lines 115-122).

2. Please clarify “ref” values in Table 5.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 04 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 plosone@plos.org. When you're 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.

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). 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

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

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Alexandra Lucas

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.  Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

" The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"This work was supported by Grant 2018-2-65 for Youth Research Fund

 from Fujian Provincial Health Bureau, and Grant 2018J01393 for Fund from Natural

Science Foundation of Fujian Province, China."

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

3. Your ethics statement should only 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 ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form 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

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?

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

Reviewer #2: 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

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: Love the paper and like the information but could really benefit from a native English speaker edit

----

Line 27--We aim to is awkward-- We analyzed

Line 43- Use standard abbreviation for hemoglobin (Hb) of (Hgb).

Line 65- I think you should just change dissimilarity to homology. I thin you misinterpreted the original 'Notably, 2019-nCoV was closely related (with 88% identity) to two bat-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-like coronaviruses, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21, collected in 2018 in Zhoushan, eastern China, but were more distant from SARS-CoV (about 79%) and MERS-CoV (about 50%).'

Line 80- the tense is odd..Instead of We tried. ...We provide

these things continue but as above-just a good edit

Line 118. is it CK or CK-MB? Would also include normal ranges for all measurements

Reviewer #2: Zhang et al. report clinical characteristics of 432 COVID-19 patients from two hospitals in Wuhan, China. The authors stratify their analyses by survivors (n=410) and non-survivors(n=22). Using multivariate Cox regression analyses, the authors determined that hemoglobin, creatine kinase-MB, lactate dehydrogenase and procalcitonin levels are predictors of COVID-19 mortality. This is consistent with similar published reports. Small number of non-survivors group is a limitation of the study, not acknowledged in discussion. Nonetheless, the data on the survivors group is informative and worth publishing. Typically, predictive models using the identified risk factors are presented in these studies (reviewer does not think this is needed for acceptance, but that would be helpful). Authors should address the following:

1. Please provide details on laboratory testing methodologies (lines 115-122).

2. Please clarify “ref” values in Table 5.

**********

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: Yes: Daniel O Griffin

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.

Risk factors for mortality of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients in two centers of Hubei province, China: a retrospective analysis

PONE-D-20-31483R1

Dear Dr. Zhang,

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 http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, 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 onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Alexandra Lucas

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: