Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approach

Shahab Khakpour; Amir Esrafilian; Petri Tanska; Mika E. Mononen; Rami K. Korhonen; Timo Jämsä

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0263458

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 18, 2021
20 Dec 2021 Decision Letter - Ewa Tomaszewska, Editor PONE-D-21-33350Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approachPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Shahab Khakpour, 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 Feb 03 2022 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: https://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, Ewa Tomaszewska, DVM Ph.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. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: “This project was supported by the I4Future doctoral program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 713606.” We note that you have provided information within the Acknowledgements Section. Please note that 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: “Shahab Khakpour: This project received funding from European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skoldowska-Curie grant agreement No 713606. https://www.oulu.fi/i4future/ 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. 3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability. "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. 4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ. 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. [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: No 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: The article entitled „Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approach” is an interesting work on the finite element approach to the analysis of reduction in mechanical properties of bones and its influence on fracture. The Authors introduce the problem based on many excellent works by other researchers and their research. Present all the assumptions of the experiment concerning literature and support their attitudes. The work is well planned, and the experiment is carried out correctly. The quality of the description and presentation is on a very high level. I strongly recommend the work for publication by PlosOne. Reviewer #2: The text is well written, clear and easy to comprehend and follow despite its length. I am enthusiastic about works like this and strongly recommend the publication of this work. Just some minor comments: 1. Consider unifying the nomenclature, e.g.: - lowercase epsilon (table) or lunatic epsilon (Enns-Bray formulas) in App A. - avoid to mix different methods of presenting numerical values – L227-230 SI prefixes (ms) or decimal notation (10^(-8)) - E_Total-OP/E_Normal or E_Total-OP/E_Total_Normal throughout the main text and App A. 2. L218 Correct to “Green-St Venant strain tensor” 3. Figs B1-B3 in App - Some decimal points in figures of total elastic modulus legend (on the right) are missing. 4. references are not formatted in accordance with journal requirements 5. Ref [15] – Journal title is missing 6. Figures 2-7 What do the circles mean ? Some explanation in figure’s footnote will be helpful. 7. Fig 3 and 6 – As no points can be seen on the most of the figures, also explanation in figure’s footnote will be helpful. ****** 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 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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263458.r001
Revision 1
17 Jan 2022 Author Response Dear Professor Tomaszewska, Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled “Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approach”. We appreciate the careful review and constructive suggestions. The manuscript has certainly benefited from the insightful revision suggestions. Based on the comments from the referees, we have made changes to the manuscript, which are detailed below. We are confident that we have addressed all the comments carefully and provided clear responses. Following this letter are the reviewers’ comments (in bold) with dedicated responses for each comment, including how and where the text is modified. The changes made to the manuscript are reported in italics in the response letter and marked with the Track Changes feature of the Microsoft office in the revised manuscript. Your time and considerations are greatly appreciated. Yours Sincerely, Shahab Khakpour, on behalf of all the co-authors Research Unit of Medical Imaging, Physics, and Technology (MIPT) Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland Reviewer #2: General Comment The text is well written, clear and easy to comprehend and follow despite its length. I am enthusiastic about works like this and strongly recommend the publication of this work. Just some minor comments. Response: We do appreciate your constructive and positive comments. We made our best to completely address your comments. 1 Consider unifying the nomenclature, e.g.: - lowercase epsilon (table) or lunatic epsilon (Enns-Bray formulas) in App A. - avoid to mix different methods of presenting numerical values – L227-230 SI prefixes (ms) or decimal notation(10^(-8)) - E_Total-OP/E_Normal or E_Total-OP/E_Total_Normal throughout the main text and App A. Response: Thank you for the comment. We unified the nomenclature and notations throughout the manuscript. Changes: - All epsilons in Appendix A were unified to the lowercase epsilon. - “s” was changed to “ms” in line 230 as follows: “3.36×10-5 ms in the simulations” Also, the units of horizontal axes in Fig B 1-3 were changed from s to ms. - All E_Total-OP/E_Normal were changed to E_Total-OP/E_Total_Normal throughout the text, Fig 6-8, and Fig B 1-3 (appendix B). 2 L218 Correct to “Green-St. Venant strain tensor” Response: Thank you for the comment. Changes: The typo was corrected accordingly in Line 219 as follows: “element softening (first principal strains of the Green-St.Vernant strain tensor higher than 0.014” 3 Figs B1-B3 in App - Some decimal points in figures of total elastic modulus legend (on the right) are missing Response: Thank you for the comment and for mentioning the needed change. Changes: The legends of Fig B1-B3 were crosschecked and corrected accordingly. 4 References are not formatted in accordance with journal requirements Response: Thank you for the comment. Changes: References were formatted according to the journal requirements (Vancouver style). 5 Ref [15] – Journal title is missing Response: We appreciate your comments. Changes: The reference was corrected. 6 Figures 2-7 What do the circles mean ? Some explanation in figure’s footnote will be helpful. Response: Thank you for the comment. Adding an explanation in the figure’s footnote would enhance the readability of the figures. Changes: Explaining statements were added to Figure 2-7 as follows: “Dashed circles: anatomical landmarks with a high risk of bone failure” . 7 Fig 3 and 6 – As no points can be seen on the most of the figures, also explanation in figure’s footnote will be helpful. Response: Thank you for the comment. As mentioned by you, adding the figure’s footnote would help the reader to understand them better. We also think that you addressed Fig 5, instead of Fig 6. Changes: Additional explanation was added to Fig 3 and 5 as follows: Fig 3: “Neither tensile nor compressive cortical bone failure was observed.” Fig 5: “The tensile and compressive strain concentrations were only minor.” Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: PONE-D-21-33350-Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263458.r002
20 Jan 2022 Decision Letter - Ewa Tomaszewska, Editor Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approach PONE-D-21-33350R1 Dear Dr. Shahab Khakpour, 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, Ewa Tomaszewska, DVM Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #2: (No Response) ******** 2. 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 #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. 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 #2: Yes ****** 5. 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 #2: Yes ****** 6. 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 #2: I would like to thank the Authors for reviewing and accepting all the comments and suggestions. In my opinion the article is now acceptable for publication. ****** 7. 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 #2: No https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263458.r003
Formally Accepted
26 Jan 2022 Acceptance Letter - Ewa Tomaszewska, Editor PONE-D-21-33350R1 Effect of osteoporosis-related reduction in the mechanical properties of bone on the acetabular fracture during a sideways fall: A parametric finite element approach Dear Dr. Khakpour: 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 Professor Ewa Tomaszewska Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263458.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 .