Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 8, 2021
Decision Letter - Sarah Michiels, Editor

PONE-D-21-38825Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: a population-based studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ho-A-Tham,

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 16 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,

Sarah Michiels

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

[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: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

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: 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: Thank you for considering me to review this manuscript entitled “Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: A population based study”. This study lacks novelty. The rationale is poorly justified in in the introduction. Methodological details are missing. Language could be improved by editing from a native English language editor.

Abstract

Objective seems to be merged into the introduction. Kindly correct it.

Methods: There is no discussion of inclusion/exclusion criteria here which is imperative to include.

Results: Confidence intervals should also be reported along with odds ratio. Interpretation of OR is incomplete without CI.

Authors are discussing associations here which was not mentioned in the objectives of the study. Results should be discussed in line with the objectives of the study.

Introduction

This section could be improved by adding more literature pertaining to the concerned topic. Further, link between PA and other variables should be thoroughly discussed.

Methods

Include information on psychometric properties of the outcomes variables in the methods section.

Categorization of ethnic groups should be clearly mentioned.

Include a paragraph on study protocol where a brief summary of the study can be described.

Statistical analysis

Some points regarding the data analysis are unclear. Intricate details of regression analysis are required. What were the predictors and independent variables in the analysis? What all covariates were considered in the regression analysis?

Discussion

Line 252-254: Age and educational level were not variables of interest. Results should be discussed in line with the objectives of the study.

Discussion seems insufficient. Findings of all variables are not discussed and relevant studies are very scant. A detailed discussion on findings of each variable is required.

Reviewer #2: than you for your effort, and your manuscript needs some revision

The purpose of this study is to examine the physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname

The statistical power and research design are sound. Understanding the rationale for the research question can be improved through a revised introduction.

In abstract introduction: Chronic low back pain (CBLP) change to CLBP

Discussion

This section needs more explanation particularly, comparisons with previous similar studies.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

Dear Academic Editor, PLOS ONE, dear Dr. Sarah Michiels,

We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised copy of our manuscript entitled ‘Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: a population-based study’. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing valuable feedback on our manuscript. We are grateful to the reviewers for their insightful comments for correction or modification we believe have resulted in an improved revised manuscript. We have been able to incorporate most of the changes after reflecting on the suggestions provided by the reviewers. We have highlighted these changes within the manuscript via track changes. Please find our responses to reviewer’s remarks, as well as the location of the changes in the revised manuscript and in the document entitled 'Response to reviewers'. We look forward to hearing from you regarding our submission. We would be glad to respond to any further questions and comments that you or the reviewers may have.

Sincerely yours,

Nancy Ho-A-Tham, corresponding author

Dear Reviewer#1,

Thank you for your comments and useful suggestions. We have revised the abstract introduction, to make the rationale of the study clearer to the reader. We have also corrected the sentence of the objectives of the study. Please find our responses to your remarks, as well as the location of the changes in the manuscript and in the document entitled 'Response to reviewers'.

Dear Reviewer#2,

We would like to thank you for your useful comments and suggestions. We appreciate your support. Please find our changes in the manuscript and the document entitled 'Response to reviewers'.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Sarah Michiels, Editor

Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: a population-based study

PONE-D-21-38825R1

Dear Dr. Ho-A-Tham,

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,

Sarah Michiels

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: 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 #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed for "Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: a population-based study"

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Sarah Michiels, Editor

PONE-D-21-38825R1

Physical activity, fear avoidance beliefs and level of disability in a multi-ethnic female population with chronic low back pain in Suriname: a population-based study

Dear Dr. Ho-A-Tham:

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

Prof. Sarah Michiels

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 .