Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 5, 2021
Decision Letter - Prakash Kumar Sarangi, Editor

PONE-D-21-32004Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the Sustainable Development GoalsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kristina,

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 Apr 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,

Prakash Kumar Sarangi

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

Additional Editor Comments:

major revision

[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: No

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

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: 1. There are some papers/ reports/ online information on the same topic and, therefore it is not clear how this paper is distinguished from the previously published papers/ reports/ online information and what is the overall novelty of this paper. This must be clearly outlined in the 'Introduction'.

2. In discussion section, based on present study, elaborate (as far as possible) in detail regarding all potential strategies that can have promising viability in terms of implementation of alcohol policy measures for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Reviewer #2: Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the Sustainable

Development Goals is good work done by the author. However, it needs little more discussions.

The interpretation of the data and the results could be better.

Results can be discussed in a better way.

Proper referencing is required in the methods section.

**********

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: Dr. Akhilesh Kumar Singh, Mahatma Gandhi Central University, Bihar, India

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.

Revision 1

Dear Prakash and dear reviewers,

thank you very much for your valuable comments. Please find our responses below.

Kind regards,

Kristina

Reviewer #1: 1. There are some papers/ reports/ online information on the same topic and, therefore it is not clear how this paper is distinguished from the previously published papers/ reports/ online information and what is the overall novelty of this paper. This must be clearly outlined in the 'Introduction'.

Response:

We have divided available related information into three categories and described the focus of the studies/reports/ belonging into these categories. (That has also led to adding two more sources to the Bibliography).

1. Problem description – alcohol harm is an impediment to achievement of sustainable development

2. Analysis of policy making in general and the Agenda 2030 in particular characterized by policy incoherence caused by emphasizing public health and at the same time furthering trade and partnership of governments with the private sector, including industries with vested interests.

3. Description of barriers that prevent making alcohol policy the priority in should be in the design of policies to achieve sustainable development

Then we have described the focus of this paper that is different from the literature available. To our knowledge, there is no similar paper that would offer a systematic overview of how governments report on their use of alcohol policy solutions in their work with Agenda 2030.

Reviewer #1: 2. In discussion section, based on present study, elaborate (as far as possible) in detail regarding all potential strategies that can have promising viability in terms of implementation of alcohol policy measures for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Response:

We have presented the three alcohol policy best buys and implementation actions/strategies they include as well as benefits of their implementation. We have also inserted an overview of selected examples showing adverse effect of alcohol use on achievement of SDGs. A complete overview of and a deeper elaboration on the impact of each alcohol policy measure on achievement of a particular SDG would be a separate paper.

Reviewer #2: Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the Sustainable

Development Goals is good work done by the author. However, it needs little more discussions.

The interpretation of the data and the results could be better.

Results can be discussed in a better way.

Proper referencing is required in the methods section.

Response:

In the discussion and interpretation

- We expanded the reflection on implementation strategies of the three alcohol policy best buys.

- We reflected on the nature of solutions countries discuss in their VNRs – population-wide vs individual responsibility

- We reasoned why the lack of consideration of alcohol policy best buys is a missed opportunity.

- We added a reason to the lack of consideration of alcohol policy solutions

- We added possible country response to these reasons

In the results we added a text about the importance of the 3.5.2 indicator, we elaborated on intermediate impact, impact of the SDG3 on other goals and we have added a reflection on the impact of “SDGs in focus” on reporting and of the report length on the level of elaboration.

Referencing in the methods section has been improved (references to HLPF, VNRs)

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Prakash Kumar Sarangi, Editor

Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals

PONE-D-21-32004R1

Dear Dr. kristina,

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,

Prakash Kumar Sarangi

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

accepted

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Prakash Kumar Sarangi, Editor

PONE-D-21-32004R1

Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals

Dear Dr. Sperkova:

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. Prakash Kumar Sarangi

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 .