PONE-D-21-10469

Implementation fidelity of Tuberculosis Preventive Therapy for under five children exposed to Sputum Smear Positive Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Kaski district, Nepal: an implementation research

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ghimire,

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 Jan 01 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,

Troy D. Moon, M.D., M.P.H

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Overall I feel this is an important piece of work and based on my review of the manuscript feel the implementation of the study was done well.

Major issues: This manuscript requires significant editing for english language, flow, and formatting consistency. In its current state the reader must read a paragraph multiple times to determine what the authors were trying to convey.

Minor revisions needed:

Introduction

Lines 57-62. Multiple sentences basically saying the same thing. Please rewrite and consolidate.

Line 96. It is not clear what you mean by a sub-recipient approach

The introduction could potentially be reduced by half its word count without losing its meaning with good editing.

Methods

The framework you use has five domains for measurement: 1) adherence; 2) comprehensiveness of policy; 3) facilitation strategies; 4) quality of delivery; and 5) patient responsiveness. However, you then describe them in terms of 1) adherence and 2) moderating factors without really explaining why you are aggregating domains 2-5 under one term. Consider explaining better or describing your assessment in terms of each domain listed

Results

• Consider combining Tables 1 and 2

• You have two Table #1’s

• For Comprehensiveness of policy be consistent. You also refer to it as Complexity of policy

• Lines 229 – 235. These quotes reinforce that the program was not implemented well but they do not the prior paragraph in which you state the objectives of contact tracing were not understood

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 the names of the six different health facilities in this study.

3. In your ethics statement in the Methods section and in the online submission form, please provide additional information about the data used in the retrospective part of your study. Specifically, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

4. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent for the qualitative research part of your study. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified whether consent was informed.

5. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

6. 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.

7. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

"This research was a part of postgraduate thesis. The scholarship for this degree was funded by the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases at the World Health Organization (WHO/TDR) and Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia.The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

We note that one or more of the authors is affiliated with the funding organization, indicating the funder may have had some role in the design, data collection, analysis or preparation of your manuscript for publication; in other words, the funder played an indirect role through the participation of the co-authors. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please do the following:

a. Review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. These amendments should be made in the online form.

b. Confirm in your cover letter that you agree with the following statement, and we will change the online submission form on your behalf: 

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.

8. Please upload a new copy of Figure 2 as the detail is not clear. Please follow the link for more information: " ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple">https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/06/looking-good-tips-for-creating-your-plos-figures-graphics/" " ext-link-type="uri" xlink:type="simple">https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/06/looking-good-tips-for-creating-your-plos-figures-graphics/"

[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: N/A

**********

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

**********

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: No

**********

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 addresses a very interesting issue, which has not been the object of many studies up to date. In 2021, Nepal has joined the list of high MDR/RR-TB burden countries, and the information reported in this manuscript may be very useful for implementers working on the prevention of pediatric tuberculosis. In general, paper’ structure is adequate, and data has been collected and handled properly. Results look reasonably drawn from the data available, and the authors correctly point out limitations, which are common in retrospective studies. However, language used is not very clear, making a good part of the document difficult to follow. I strongly advise the authors to work with a text editor or a writing coach in order to improve text readability.

Nevertheless, because of the importance of this topic, I believe the authors should be given an opportunity to fully review their manuscript and resubmit a second version for evaluation.

The “Introduction” section is well structured and refers to relevant literature. However, language is poor, with many iterations and information repeated in different places. I believe that addressing language issues may result in a quite informative introduction.

In the “Material and methods” section, the sub-section “A conceptual framework for the study” contains some inconsistencies. For example, authors talk about “…comprehensiveness of policy…”, but later this is transformed to “…complexities of policy…” without giving any explanation. The section is well structured, although it would greatly benefit of a review by a text editor.

The “Results” section looks well organized. However, the sub-section “Data sources” has a paragraph repeated. Also, table numbering is incorrect, there are two different “Table 1”. Statistics consist of very simple descriptive parameters and they look alright. Sub-section on “Moderating factors” is really interesting, but again an English language review would greatly improve it.

The “Discussion” and “Conclusion” sections have both a good structure, but again, the language used makes it difficult to read. Main points drawn out seem to be well supported by the data presented in the manuscript.

**********

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: Emilio Jose Valverde

[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.

Implementation fidelity of Tuberculosis Preventive Therapy for under five children exposed to Sputum Smear Positive Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Kaski district, Nepal: an implementation research

PONE-D-21-10469R1

Dear Dr. Ghimire,

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,

Troy D. Moon, M.D., M.P.H

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE