Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMarch 1, 2022
Decision Letter - Francesco Maria Galassi, Editor

PONE-D-22-06158Sero-surveillance for IgG to SARS-CoV-2 at antenatal care clinics in three Kenyan referral hospitals: repeated cross-sectional surveys 2020-21PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Gallagher,

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 11 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,

Francesco Maria Galassi, MD MRSB MCSFS FRSPH

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. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements. PLOS does not permit references to inaccessible data. We require that authors provide all relevant data within the paper, Supporting Information files, or in an acceptable, public repository. Please add a citation to support this phrase or upload the data that corresponds with these findings to a stable repository (such as Figshare or Dryad) and provide and URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. Or, if the data are not a core part of the research being presented in your study, we ask that you remove the phrase that refers to these data.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

4. 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.

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

“This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017547), and the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) through the East Africa Research Fund (EARF/ITT/039) and is part of an integrated programme of SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in Kenya led by KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme.

A.A. is funded by a DFID/MRC/NIHR/Wellcome Trust Joint Global Health Trials Award (MR/R006083/1), J.A.G.S. is funded by a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship (214320) and the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Immunisation, I.M.O.A. is funded by the United Kingdom’s Medical Research Council and Department For International Development through an African Research Leader Fellowship (MR/S005293/1) and by the NIHR-MPRU at UCL (grant 2268427 LSHTM). G.M.W. is supported by a fellowship from the Oak Foundation. C.N.A. is funded by the DELTAS Africa Initiative [DEL-15-003], and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome (220985/Z/20/Z). S.U. is funded by DELTAS Africa Initiative [DEL-15-003], L.I.O.-O. is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Fellowship (107568/Z/15/Z). R.A is funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (project reference 17/63/82) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funding agencies”

We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. 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:

“This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017547), and the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) through the East Africa Research Fund (EARF/ITT/039) and is part of an integrated programme of SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in Kenya led by KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme. 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.

6. Thank you for stating the following in the Competing Interests/Financial Disclosure * (delete as necessary) section:

“This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017547), and the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) through the East Africa Research Fund (EARF/ITT/039) and is part of an integrated programme of SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in Kenya led by KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

We note that you received funding from a commercial source: “Wellcome Trust”

Please provide an amended Competing Interests Statement that explicitly states this commercial funder, along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, marketed products, etc.

Within this Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).  If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your amended Competing Interests Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

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.

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: This is a succint report of seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2 in Kenya. Well executed and well presented. My major comment is that the infection with the virus, as evidenced by the presence of antibodies in blood samples, is considered the prevalence of the disease. Many patients were asymptomatic, in some the antibodies could be effective at fighting infection and thus preventing any symptoms. This comment is not directed specifically at the Authors, but refers to the general confusion of the disease with the infection by its causative agent. Infection does not mean disease (presence of disrupted organismal homeostasis).

In the "Discussion" the Authors repeat details of the results unnecessarily. The last sentence of the Discussion (lines 319-320) is insightful.

As a South African who lived through the years of the downfall of the apartheid, I found the use of the acronym ANC confusing (African National Congress) and the other acronyms interferring with understanding of the text. Thre is no list of abbreviations, but I would encourage Authors to avoid the use of acronyms in a publication on-line whose cost is not affected by the number of words, or characters, used in the text.

Reviewer #2: The authors of this manuscript, entitled “Sero-surveillance for IgG to SARS-CoV-2 at antenatal care clinics in three Kenyan referral hospitals: repeated cross-sectional surveys 2020-21”, presented a cross-sectional study aimed at assessing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Kenya. The manuscript fits the aim of “PLOS ONE,” which publishes papers and research in the area of the natural sciences, medical research, engineering, and the related social sciences and humanities.

The title, as well as the abstract, are informative; nevertheless, the study’s aim has not been clearly described and needs to be elucidated in more detail,

Introduction requires a deeper contextualization of SARS-CoV-2 infection

Finally, the text should be written in a scientific style containing passive voice and 3rd person.

Moreover, check the references list and the references cited in the text. Please review them for completeness and errors and note that according to PLOS ONE, the references must be cited in the Vancouver style.

Therefore, I strongly recommend accepting the manuscript after minor revision.

**********

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: Maciej Henneberg

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.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Reviewer comments on PONE-D-22-06158.docx
Revision 1

Editorial comments:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Response: We apologise for this oversight. We have gone through the document and amended the formatting of the title page, headings, figures and tables accordingly.

2. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements.

Response: We apologise for the confusion - the data the statement refers to is included in the full dataset which is available in the repository as indicated, we have removed ‘data not shown’.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

Response: Done

4. In your Data Availability statement (online form), you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. 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

Response: Data is deposited in the institutional data repository as per KWTRP policies. Please include the following statement in the manuscript:

“ Data are available upon request from the KWTRP online data repository by submitting a data request form to the KWTRP Data Governance committee here: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/kwtrp”

5. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement

Response: We have removed the funding statement from the manuscript. Please amend the funding statement in the application portal to the statement that was in the manuscript:

“This project was funded by the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017547), and the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) through the East Africa Research Fund (EARF/ITT/039) and is part of an integrated programme of SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in Kenya led by KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme. A.A. is funded by a DFID/MRC/NIHR/Wellcome Trust Joint Global Health Trials Award (MR/R006083/1), J.A.G.S. is funded by a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship (214320) and the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Immunisation, I.M.O.A. is funded by the United Kingdom’s Medical Research Council and Department For International Development through an African Research Leader Fellowship (MR/S005293/1) and by the NIHR-MPRU at UCL (grant 2268427 LSHTM). G.M.W. is supported by a fellowship from the Oak Foundation. C.N.A. is funded by the DELTAS Africa Initiative [DEL-15-003], and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome (220985/Z/20/Z). S.U. is funded by DELTAS Africa Initiative [DEL-15-003], L.I.O.-O. is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Fellowship (107568/Z/15/Z). R.A is funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (project reference 17/63/82) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funding agencies. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

6. Please include your amended Competing Interests Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Response: Please include the amended statement below: “This project was funded by a commercial source, the Wellcome Trust (grants 220991/Z/20/Z and 203077/Z/16/Z). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Authors declare no other competing interests.”

Reviewer comments:

Reviewer #1:

- This is a succint report of seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2 in Kenya. Well executed and well presented. My major comment is that the infection with the virus, as evidenced by the presence of antibodies in blood samples, is considered the prevalence of the disease. Many patients were asymptomatic, in some the antibodies could be effective at fighting infection and thus preventing any symptoms. This comment is not directed specifically at the Authors, but refers to the general confusion of the disease with the infection by its causative agent. Infection does not mean disease (presence of disrupted organismal homeostasis). In the "Discussion" the Authors repeat details of the results unnecessarily. The last sentence of the Discussion (lines 319-320) is insightful. As a South African who lived through the years of the downfall of the apartheid, I found the use of the acronym ANC confusing (African National Congress) and the other acronyms interferring with understanding of the text. Thre is no list of abbreviations, but I would encourage Authors to avoid the use of acronyms in a publication on-line whose cost is not affected by the number of words, or characters, used in the text.

Response: We thank the reviewer for their comments, we agree the acronym maybe confusing, and we have removed it from the manuscript in this revision.

Reviewer #2:

- The authors of this manuscript, entitled “Sero-surveillance for IgG to SARS-CoV-2 at antenatal care clinics in three Kenyan referral hospitals: repeated cross-sectional surveys 2020-21”, presented a cross-sectional study aimed at assessing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Kenya. The manuscript fits the aim of “PLOS ONE,” which publishes papers and research in the area of the natural sciences, medical research, engineering, and the related social sciences and humanities.The title, as well as the abstract, are informative; nevertheless, the study’s aim has not been clearly described and needs to be elucidated in more detail. Introduction requires a deeper contextualization of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Finally, the text should be written in a scientific style containing passive voice and 3rd person. Moreover, check the references list and the references cited in the text. Please review them for completeness and errors and note that according to PLOS ONE, the references must be cited in the Vancouver style.Therefore, I strongly recommend accepting the manuscript after minor revision.

Response: We thank the reviewer for their comments, we have stated the aim on line 89-90 of the manuscript “We aimed to determine the prevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in mothers attending antenatal care at three referral hospitals in Kenya”. We have not changed ‘voice’ due to a stated preference for active voice on the submission guidelines. We have reformatted the references according to the editorial guidelines.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Gheyath K. Nasrallah, Editor

Sero-surveillance for IgG to SARS-CoV-2 at antenatal care clinics in three Kenyan referral hospitals: repeated cross-sectional surveys 2020-21

PONE-D-22-06158R1

Dear Dr. Gallagher, 

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,

Gheyath K. Nasrallah

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Gheyath K. Nasrallah, Editor

PONE-D-22-06158R1

Sero-surveillance for IgG to SARS-CoV-2 at antenatal care clinics in three Kenyan referral hospitals: repeated cross-sectional surveys 2020-21

Dear Dr. Gallagher:

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. Gheyath K. Nasrallah

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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 .