Determinants of anthroponotic cutaneous leishmaniasis by case-control study in Morocco

Mounia Amane; Mohamed Echchakery; Mohamed Daoudi; Mohamed Hafidi; Samia Boussaa

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0266291

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMarch 16, 2022
4 May 2022 Decision Letter - Albert Schriefer, Editor PONE-D-22-07886Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in MoroccoPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Boussa, 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. Both reviewers acknowledged the relevance of the study in updating aspects of the current knowledge of cutaneous leishmaniasis endemics in Morocco. They also made valuable comments that would help to improve language, distribution of information, and description of the study, as well as to clarify some points in the report. Please, make sure you thoroughly address all issues raised by both reviewers, and attempt to incorporate a substantial proportion of the suggestions in a revised version of the manuscript. Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 18 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, Albert Schriefer, M.D., Ph.D. Section 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 amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical. 4. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain [map/satellite] 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: a) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 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].” b) 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/ [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: 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: No 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: In the current study, some important determinants of local anthroponotic cutaneous leishmaniasis are investigated in Morocco. Introduction: Line 47: At the beginning of each sentence the scientific names must be in complete form (L. tropica must be changed to Leishmania tropica). Results: There are some errors in table 2 which must be corrected (in Gender line after parenthesis if cases”1” must be deleted. In the line of level of study, “Literary” is misspelled). Sandfly/sandflies should be written separately (sand fly/ sand flies) in the manuscript. Line 272: Scientific names must be written in italic form (P. sergenti must be in italic). Discussion: Lines 212-223 are not related to the discussion. These sentences can be included in the introduction. The results should not be repeated in discussion. All p values in the discussion should be omitted. In discussion, the results should be compared with the results of other studies and described. In the last paragraph of the discussion (lines: 293-301) all factors should be included. Using mosquito nets is missed. There are many valuable published articles by Iranian scientists. It is recommended that the authors of the current manuscript use them for the introduction and results. For example for the effect of mosquito nets on cutaneous leishmaniasis the following references can be used: -Moosa-Kazemi SH, Yaghoobi-Ershadi MR, Akhavan AA, Abdoli H, Zahraei-Ramazani AR, Jafari R, Houshmand B, Nadim A, Hosseini M. (2007) Deltamethrin-impregnated bed nets and curtains in an anthroponotic cutaneous leishmaniasis control program in northeastern Iran. Ann Saudi Med. 27(1): 6–12. - Yaghoobi-Ershadi MR, Moosa-Kazemi SH, Zahraei-Ramazani AR, Jalali-Zand AR, Akhavan AA, Arandian MH, Abdoli H, Houshmand B, Nadim A, Hosseini M. (2006) Evaluation of deltamethrin-impregnated bed nets and curtains for control of zoonotic cutaneous leishmaniasis in a hyperendemic area of Iran. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 99(1): 43–48. Reviewer #2: Line 15: "Are" should be replaced with "is". Line 28: Whether absent of sewage system is beneficial or its presence? its unclear. Please rephrase the sentence. Line 38: "Are" should be replaced with "is". Line 54: Here the reference, Boussaa et al is not cited properly, i.e. by numbering. Please do the needful. Line 99-103: Please explain more about sample size calculation. It is not well explained at all. Line 119-122: How the data was tabulated and how categorization was done? This part can be more explained for better understanding, like what is the process of categorization etc. Line 136: Please mention whether the consent taken is written or verbal. Line 147: Change the phrase as : "females are more affected". Line 193-195: Sentence is not properly understood. Please re-phrase the sentence. Line 202: Rephrase the sentence as : presence of vegetation. Line 224: Use of reference 27 is not understood. You have sated about your study findings here, so how reference 27 is appropriate here? Line 230: How is this associated? Negatively or positively? Line 267-275: This part could be better explained, why there is such finding, whats the reason behind it. Line 278-279: Please explain. ****** 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: Amir Ahmad Akhavan Reviewer #2: Yes:** Dr. Moytrey Chatterjee [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.0266291.r001
Revision 1
21 Jun 2022 Author Response RESPONSE LETTER PONE-D-22-07886 Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in Morocco PLOS ONE Dear Editor, Thank you for the opportunity to submit a revised version of our manuscript entitled “Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in Morocco”. We appreciate the time and efforts you and the reviewers have put into providing your valuable comments on our manuscript. We are grateful for your insightful comments on our paper. We were able to incorporate changes to reflect all the suggestions provided. We have highlighted the changes in the manuscript. Sincerely, Pr S. BOUSSAA Corresponding author 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 Authors: The revised manuscript was formatted according to PLOS ONE's style 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. Authors: The ethics statement section has been rewritten, based on comments from the editor and reviewer, to be more informative. 3. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical. Authors: The abstract on the online submission was updated. 4. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain [map/satellite] 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: a) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 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].” b) 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/ Authors: Figures 1 and 2 were performed by authors; consequently we can publish it on open access form under CC BY 4.0. We used free sheapfile from https://mapcruzin.com/free-morocco-arcgis-maps-shapefiles.htm, for map creation (Fig. 1). Figures were presented under TIF format and titles were modified according to the journal recommendations’ Reviewer #1: In the current study, some important determinants of local anthroponotic cutaneous leishmaniasis are investigated in Morocco. Introduction: Line 47: At the beginning of each sentence the scientific names must be in complete form (L. tropica must be changed to Leishmania tropica). Authors: Thank you to the Reviewer for the positive feedback and useful comments. This remark has been corrected throughout the manuscript. Results: There are some errors in table 2 which must be corrected (in Gender line after parenthesis if cases”1” must be deleted. In the line of level of study, “Literary” is misspelled). Authors: Tables were modified according to Reviewer comments Sandfly/sandflies should be written separately (sand fly/ sand flies) in the manuscript. Line 272: Scientific names must be written in italic form (P. sergenti must be in italic). Authors: These remarks have been corrected throughout the manuscript. Discussion: Lines 212-223 are not related to the discussion. These sentences can be included in the introduction. The results should not be repeated in discussion. All p values in the discussion should be omitted. In discussion, the results should be compared with the results of other studies and described. In the last paragraph of the discussion (lines: 293-301) all factors should be included. Using mosquito nets is missed. There are many valuable published articles by Iranian scientists. It is recommended that the authors of the current manuscript use them for the introduction and results. For example for the effect of mosquito nets on cutaneous leishmaniasis the following references can be used: -Moosa-Kazemi SH, Yaghoobi-Ershadi MR, Akhavan AA, Abdoli H, Zahraei-Ramazani AR, Jafari R, Houshmand B, Nadim A, Hosseini M. (2007) Deltamethrin-impregnated bed nets and curtains in an anthroponotic cutaneous leishmaniasis control program in northeastern Iran. Ann Saudi Med. 27(1): 6–12. - Yaghoobi-Ershadi MR, Moosa-Kazemi SH, Zahraei-Ramazani AR, Jalali-Zand AR, Akhavan AA, Arandian MH, Abdoli H, Houshmand B, Nadim A, Hosseini M. (2006) Evaluation of deltamethrin-impregnated bed nets and curtains for control of zoonotic cutaneous leishmaniasis in a hyperendemic area of Iran. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 99(1): 43–48. Authors: Thank you for these valuable remark and resources. The Discussion section was reviewed according to the comments and all references were included. Please see the revised version of the manuscript Reviewer #2: Line 15: "Are" should be replaced with "is". Line 38: "Are" should be replaced with "is". Authors: Thank you to the Reviewer for the positive feedback and useful comments. These remarks were fixed Line 28: Whether absent of sewage system is beneficial or its presence? its unclear. Please rephrase the sentence. Authors: According to our results, the absent of sewage system/waste management increases the risk of ACL which means that its presence is beneficial (protective factor). This sentence was reviewed in the revised version of the manuscript. Line 54: Here the reference, Boussaa et al is not cited properly, i.e. by numbering. Please do the needful. Authors: Thank you for this comment. The manuscript was revised according to the journal style. Line 99-103: Please explain more about sample size calculation. It is not well explained at all. Authors: We added a paragraph in material and methods section about sample size calculation in this case- control study. Line 119-122: How the data was tabulated and how categorization was done? This part can be more explained for better understanding, like what is the process of categorization etc. Authors: We added a paragraph at our opining paragraph of the material and methods section to help the reader to undesrstand : “The questionnaire has three sections covering socio-demographic (Gendre, Age, Matrimonial status, Level of study, knowledge about leishmaniasis), socioeconomic (Number of children per family, Person per household, Provinces, Monthly income (dhs), Zone, Travel to endemic area, Profession) and environmental data (Sewage system/waste management, Toilet/ Waste water management, Mosquito nets, Vegetation, Farm animals, Companion animals). The categorisation was based on previous studies exploring the factors of leishmaniasis in all its forms (28) (29)”. Please see the revised version of the manuscript. Line 136: Please mention whether the consent taken is written or verbal. Authors: The ethics statement section has been rewritten, based on comments from the editor and reviewer, to be more informative. Line 147: Change the phrase as : "females are more affected". Line 202: Rephrase the sentence as : presence of vegetation. Authors: Phrases were changed accordantly Line 193-195: Sentence is not properly understood. Please re-phrase the sentence. Authors: This section was modified according to the Reviewer comments. Please see the revised version of the manuscript. Line 224: Use of reference 27 is not understood. You have sated about your study findings here, so how reference 27 is appropriate here? Authors: This paragraph was rephrased to be clearer. Line 230: How is this associated? Negatively or positively? Authors: This is associated negatively, we rectified it in manuscript Line 267-275: This part could be better explained, why there is such finding, whats the reason behind it. Authors: This part was developed and more explained according to the reviewer comment. Line 278-279: Please explain. Authors: This paragraph was rephrased to be clearer. Please see the revised version of the manuscript. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response Letter PLOS.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266291.r002
13 Jul 2022 Decision Letter - Albert Schriefer, Editor PONE-D-22-07886R1Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in MoroccoPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Boussa, 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. More specifically, please, address the minor issue regarding the citations raised by reviewer one. Also, please, kindly carry out one last round of language editing (detailed in the 'Additional Editor Comments' section at the end of this letter) before we can proceed to full acceptance of your manuscript. Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 27 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, Albert Schriefer, M.D., Ph.D. Section 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. Additional Editor Comments : Before we can proceed to acceptance, I would like to ask the authors for a last round of English language correction. There are several capitalization and punctuation mistakes affecting mostly the new text inserted to conform with the reviewers suggestions and comments. However, some mistakes are still present in the original text. So, please, make the language review thorough and cautious. The only intent of this demand is to make your study as clear as possible to the general audience, potentially increasing its reach. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] 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 #1: (No Response) Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 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 #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes 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 #1: Yes 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 #1: Yes 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 #1: Thanks for considering my comments BUT some references in the text are not matched with the number indicated in the References section such as the references 45-47. Please check all references throughout the manuscript and match them with the corresponding number in the References section. Reviewer #2: (No Response) ****** 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 #1: Yes: Amir Ahmad Akhavan, Professor of Medical Entomology and Vector Control, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr. Moytrey Chatterjee ******** [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.0266291.r003
Revision 2
25 Aug 2022 Author Response Please see the response Letter https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266291.r004
9 Sep 2022 Decision Letter - Albert Schriefer, Editor PONE-D-22-07886R2Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in MoroccoPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Boussa, 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. More specifically, please, kindly make the very minor edits suggested in the 'Additional Editor Comments' section below before we move on to acceptance of the manuscript. Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 24 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, Albert Schriefer, M.D., Ph.D. Section 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. Additional Editor Comments (if provided): Line 130, Methods. Please adjust the sentence 'a confirmed case of ACL is a person presents clinical signs' to read 'a confirmed case of ACL is a person that presents clinical signs'. Line 208, Results. Please adjust the sentence 'The chance of acquiring ACL is 4.53 times more increased for displaced people' to read 'The chance of acquiring ACL is 4.53 times higher for displaced people'. Line 234, Results. Please check if the word 'habitants' would not be the correct one, instead of 'habitats' in this sentence. Line 249, Discussion. Please, adjust the sentence 'that category of civil servants people can be a protective factor for ACL' to read 'and the category of civil servants people can be a protective factor for ACL'. Line 271, Discussion. Please check if the word 'habitants' would not be the correct one, instead of 'habitats' in this sentence. Line 283, Discussion. Please, adjust the sentence 'several studies confirmed the effect of this strategies for control of zoonotic cutaneous leishmaniasis' to read 'several studies confirmed the effect of these strategies for controling of zoonotic cutaneous leishmaniasis'. Line 330, Discussion. Please, adjust the sentence 'Our finding suggests also improving the awareness of the population in endemic and non-endemic area' to read 'Our finding suggests also improving the awareness of the population in endemic and non-endemic areas'. [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.0266291.r005
Revision 3
21 Sep 2022 Author Response Please see Response Letter https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266291.r006
26 Sep 2022 Decision Letter - Albert Schriefer, Editor Determinants of Anthroponotic Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by Case-Control Study in Morocco PONE-D-22-07886R3 Dear Dr. Boussa, 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, Albert Schriefer, M.D., Ph.D. Section Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266291.r007
Formally Accepted
5 Oct 2022 Acceptance Letter - Albert Schriefer, Editor PONE-D-22-07886R3 DETERMINANTS OF ANTHROPONOTIC CUTANEOUS LEISHMANIASIS BY CASE-CONTROL STUDY IN MOROCCO Dear Dr. Boussaa: 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. Albert Schriefer Section Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266291.r008

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 .