Global distribution of sporadic sapovirus infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Marta Diez Valcarce; Anita K. Kambhampati; Laura E. Calderwood; Aron J. Hall; Sara A. Mirza; Jan Vinjé

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0255436

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionApril 8, 2021
3 Jun 2021 Decision Letter - Maria Elena Flacco, Editor PONE-D-21-11650 Global distribution of sporadic sapovirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Vinjé, 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 manuscript focuses on a very important issue, and is, overall, methodologically appropriate. I have a few reservations about the manuscript as it currently stands. However, if the authors will be able to address the following issues, I believe that it may be re-considered for publication. 1. In addition to reporting the results (and commenting in them) throughout the text, the pooled results (at leeast those referring to the main analyses) should be displayed in appropriate tables. This would substantially increase the clarity of the manuscript, and help the readers delving into data. 2. The use of "cases" and "controls" definition throughout the text is potentially misleading to define subjects with and without AGE, as there is no formal comparison between groups. I would replace with something like "symptomatic" and "asymptomatic". 3. Meta-regression - partially linked to point 1: which studies were included? And which are the covariates considered? Please add some more details and display the results of the meta-regression in a specific table. Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 17 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. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Maria Elena Flacco, M.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE 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. 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. We note that Figure 2 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright. We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission: 2.1. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 2 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text: “I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.” Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission. In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].” 2.2. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only. The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful: USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/ Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/ USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/# Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/ 3. We note that this manuscript is a systematic review or meta-analysis; our author guidelines therefore require that you use PRISMA guidance to help improve reporting quality of this type of study. Please upload copies of the completed PRISMA checklist as Supporting Information with a file name “PRISMA checklist”. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255436.r001
Revision 1
13 Jul 2021 Author Response PONE-D-21-11650 RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS The manuscript focuses on a very important issue, and is, overall, methodologically appropriate. I have a few reservations about the manuscript as it currently stands. However, if the authors will be able to address the following issues, I believe that it may be re-considered for publication. Thank you very much for your review of the paper. We have made the revisions below. In addition to the suggested revisions, we have separated the “method of detection” category into: 1. detection methods based on conventional PCR and 2. Detection methods based on real time PCR (which includes probe-based realtime RT-PCR methods as well as modern multienteric pathogen platforms such as FilmArray (Biofire)). We believe that these two categories account more accurately the potential differences observed among the published studies included in our analysis. 1. In addition to reporting the results (and commenting in them) throughout the text, the pooled results (at least those referring to the main analyses) should be displayed in appropriate tables. This would substantially increase the clarity of the manuscript, and help the readers delving into data. As requested, we have included the pooled results in a table, which also includes data that were previously presented in supplementary figures. We have removed the original figures. 2. The use of "cases" and "controls" definition throughout the text is potentially misleading to define subjects with and without AGE, as there is no formal comparison between groups. I would replace with something like "symptomatic" and "asymptomatic". Thank you for this feedback. We have revised our terminology to indicate these groups refer to “AGE cases” and “non-AGE controls” and clarified in the methods that the terminology refers to the case definitions used in the original studies, many of which had formal comparisons. Studies had varying definitions for both AGE cases and non-AGE controls; for example, in some studies, non-AGE controls may have been completely asymptomatic for a specified period of time, while others allowed for inclusion as controls those who had some symptoms but did not meet the AGE case definition. Thus, it may not be appropriate to refer to these groups as symptomatic/asymptomatic. 3. Meta-regression - partially linked to point 1: which studies were included? And which are the covariates considered? Please add some more details and display the results of the meta-regression in a specific table. The meta-regression analysis was conducted as a sensitivity analysis and did not add additional clarity to the other results. As such, we have removed the description of the meta-regression from our manuscript. Journal Requirements: Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. We have confirmed that the manuscript meets PLOS ONE’s style requirements and updated any elements as required. 2. We note that Figure 2 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright. We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission. Thank you. This figure was created in R using the ggplot package, which has been cited in the text (lines 121-122). 3. We note that this manuscript is a systematic review or meta-analysis; our author guidelines therefore require that you use PRISMA guidance to help improve reporting quality of this type of study. Please upload copies of the completed PRISMA checklist as Supporting Information with a file name “PRISMA checklist”. The PRISMA checklist has been re-uploaded. The file name has been updated to “PRISMA Checklist”. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255436.r002
16 Jul 2021 Decision Letter - Maria Elena Flacco, Editor Global distribution of sporadic sapovirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis PONE-D-21-11650R1 Dear Dr. Vinjé, 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, Maria Elena Flacco, M.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255436.r003
Formally Accepted
4 Aug 2021 Acceptance Letter - Maria Elena Flacco, Editor PONE-D-21-11650R1 Global distribution of sporadic sapovirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis Dear Dr. Vinjé: I'm 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 let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, 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. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Maria Elena Flacco Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255436.r004

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 .