Using an integrated knowledge translation approach to inform a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial on peer support for individuals with traumatic brain injury: A qualitative descriptive study

Stephanie K. C. Lau; Dorothy Luong; Shane N. Sweet; Mark Bayley; Ben B. Levy; Monika Kastner; Michelle L. A. Nelson; Nancy M. Salbach; Susan B. Jaglal; John Shepherd; Ruth Wilcock; Carla Thoms; Sarah E. P. Munce

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256650

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 28, 2021
16 Jun 2021 Decision Letter - Alfio Spina, Editor PONE-D-21-06700 Using an integrated knowledge translation approach to inform a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial on peer support for individuals with traumatic brain injury: a qualitative descriptive study PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Lau, 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. Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 31 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, Alfio Spina, M.D. 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.Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information. 3. Please note that according to PLOS ONE policies, if materials, methods, and protocols are well established, authors may cite articles where those protocols are described in detail, but the submission should include sufficient information to be understood independent of these references (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-materials-and-methods).Thus, we would recommend that the methods used for sampling and recruitment of participants, and for data analysis, are reported in more detail in the Methods section. 4. Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized. Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access. We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter." 5. 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): Reviewer #1: The aim of this article is two explore key informants’perspectives (iKT) of barriers and facilitators of participating in peer support interventions and of its effectiveness, among people with TBI. Finally, the authors try to demonstrate how iKT can be useful in the development of a RCT. The article is well-written in a correct English. TBI affects millions of people each year worldwide. In addition to the physical and cognitive deficits, TBI can lead to depression, anxiety and reduced quality of life. A promising and cost-effective interventions is peer support. The topic of the article is interesting and not extensively development yet in neurosurgery. However, the article is, currently, too long and not completely focused on the aim of the study. The article is interesting but it is too long, this means that it is difficult to keep the attention throughout the reading. I think that the paper should be shorter and more tailored on the aim of the study. Reviewer #2: Integrating peer support into rehabilitation of severe TBI‘S patients is an interesting topic. However, multicenter studies are needed to validate utility in different countries. Furthermore this study shows the useful integration of iKT in the construction of the RCT protocol. the work is well written and I thank the authors for their submission. Academic Editor: Please revise the article according the Reviewers' comments. Reduce the lenght of the manuscript to improve its readability. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: [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.0256650.r001
Revision 1
8 Jul 2021 Author Response Dear Editor: Thank you for your email. I am pleased to hear that you believe that our manuscript will have the potential to be published in PLOS ONE following requested revisions. As per your request, please find our response to the peer-reviewers’ comments with every change outlined point by point below: ===================================================================== Editor and Reviewer comments: Reviewer #1: "The aim of this article is two explore key informants’perspectives (iKT) of barriers and facilitators of participating in peer support interventions and of its effectiveness, among people with TBI. Finally, the authors try to demonstrate how iKT can be useful in the development of a RCT. The article is well-written in a correct English. TBI affects millions of people each year worldwide. In addition to the physical and cognitive deficits, TBI can lead to depression, anxiety and reduced quality of life. A promising and cost-effective interventions is peer support. The topic of the article is interesting and not extensively development yet in neurosurgery. However, the article is, currently, too long and not completely focused on the aim of the study. The article is interesting but it is too long, this means that it is difficult to keep the attention throughout the reading. I think that the paper should be shorter and more tailored on the aim of the study." - We thank the reviewer for taking the time to provide their feedback on our manuscript. We have taken this feedback into consideration when shortening our manuscript to being more focused on the objectives. Reviewer #2: "Integrating peer support into rehabilitation of severe TBI‘S patients is an interesting topic. However, multicenter studies are needed to validate utility in different countries. Furthermore this study shows the useful integration of iKT in the construction of the RCT protocol. the work is well written and I thank the authors for their submission." - We thank the reviewer for taking the time to provide their feedback on our manuscript. Academic Editor: "Please revise the article according the Reviewers' comments. Reduce the lenght of the manuscript to improve its readability." - We thank the editor for taking the time to provide their feedback on our manuscript. We have reduced the length of the manuscript as suggested. ===================================================================== • Again, we thank the reviewers and editor for providing their feedback on our manuscript and we have taken all their feedback into consideration when revising our manuscript. Additionally, as per the journal requirements, our manuscript meets PLOS ONE’s style requirements, we specified the participant consent process, we elaborated on our methods section, and we reviewed our reference list to ensure both completeness and correctness. However, in regard to the minimal underlying data set, the relevant data are within the manuscript/supporting information files, and we cannot share the full transcripts publicly as the participants did not consent to such. However, researchers can request for access to these transcripts via the University Health Network’s Research Ethics Board. ===================================================================== Should your editorial office require any further edits following my most recently submitted submission, please do not hesitate to inform me and we will make these changes as soon as possible. Thank you for your consideration. Yours sincerely, Stephanie KC Lau, BSc, MD Candidate, on behalf of the study authors SLau065@uottawa.ca Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256650.r002
12 Aug 2021 Decision Letter - Alfio Spina, Editor Using an integrated knowledge translation approach to inform a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial on peer support for individuals with traumatic brain injury: a qualitative descriptive study PONE-D-21-06700R1 Dear Dr. Lau, 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, Alfio Spina, M.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256650.r003
Formally Accepted
16 Aug 2021 Acceptance Letter - Alfio Spina, Editor PONE-D-21-06700R1 Using an integrated knowledge translation approach to inform a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial on peer support for individuals with traumatic brain injury: a qualitative descriptive study Dear Dr. Lau: 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. Alfio Spina Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256650.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 .