Peer Review History

Original SubmissionAugust 22, 2022
Decision Letter - Donovan Anthony McGrowder, Editor

PONE-D-22-22810How chronic conditions are understood, experienced and managed within African communities in Europe, North America and Australia: a synthesis of qualitative studiesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Aikins, 

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 November 12, 2022. 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,

Donovan Anthony McGrowder, PhD., MA., MSc

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 this manuscript is a systematic review or meta-analysis; our author guidelines therefore require that you use PRISMA guidance to help improve reporting quality of this type of study. Please upload copies of the completed PRISMA checklist as Supporting Information with a file name “PRISMA checklist”.

3. 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:

Dear Dr. Aikins,   

Your manuscript “How chronic conditions are understood, experienced and managed within African communities in Europe, North America and Australia: a synthesis of qualitative studies” has been assessed by our reviewers. They have raised a number of points which we believe would improve the manuscript and may allow a revised version to be published in PLOS ONE. Their reports, together with any other comments, are below.

If you are able to fully address these points, we would encourage you to submit a revised manuscript to PLOS ONE.

Regards,

Dr. Donovan McGrowder

Associate Editor

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: 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: 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 review focuses on the lived experiences of chronic conditions among African

communities in the Global North, focusing on established immigrant communities as well as

recent immigrant, refugee, and asylum-seeking communities. We conducted a systematic and

narrative synthesis of qualitative studies published from inception to 2022, following a search

from nine databases - MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Social Science

Citation Index, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, SCOPUS and AMED. 39 articles

reporting 32 qualitative studies were included in the synthesis. The studies were conducted in

10 countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden,

Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States) and focused on 748 participants from

27 African countries. The majority of participants believed chronic conditions to be lifelong,

requiring complex interventions. Chronic illness impacted several domains of everyday life -

physical, sexual, psycho-emotional, social, and economic. Participants managed their illness

using biomedical management, traditional medical treatment and faith-based coping, in

isolation or combination. In a number of studies, participants took ‘therapeutic journeys’ –

which involved navigating illness action at home and abroad, with the support of

transnational therapy networks. Multi-level barriers to healthcare were reported across the

majority of studies.

Overall, an interesting contribution. MINOR COMMENTS:

1. Please shorten the Introduction.

2. Please provide a formal concluding paragraph.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript is well-written and scientifically-sound. The authors conducted a review to examine the lived experiences of chronic conditions among African communities in Europe and North America, and other countries in the Global North, focusing on established immigrant communities as well as recent immigrant, refugee and

asylum seeking communities. We were interested in meanings, experiences and illness action

from the perspective of individuals living with chronic conditions. The study is novel and will add to literature.

********** 

[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

RESPONSES TO REVIEWERS

Reviewer #1: This review focuses on the lived experiences of chronic conditions among African communities in the Global North, focusing on established immigrant communities as well as recent immigrant, refugee, and asylum-seeking communities. We conducted a systematic and narrative synthesis of qualitative studies published from inception to 2022, following a search from nine databases - MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Social Science Citation Index, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, SCOPUS and AMED. 39 articles reporting 32 qualitative studies were included in the synthesis. The studies were conducted in 10 countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States) and focused on 748 participants from 27 African countries. The majority of participants believed chronic conditions to be lifelong, requiring complex interventions. Chronic illness impacted several domains of everyday life - physical, sexual, psycho-emotional, social, and economic. Participants managed their illness using biomedical management, traditional medical treatment and faith-based coping, in isolation or combination. In a number of studies, participants took ‘therapeutic journeys’ – which involved navigating illness action at home and abroad, with the support of transnational therapy networks. Multi-level barriers to healthcare were reported across the majority of studies.

Overall, an interesting contribution.

Response to general comment:

We thank the reviewer for describing our review as an “interesting contribution” to the literature.

MINOR COMMENTS:

1. Please shorten the Introduction.

Response to Comment 1:

We have moved section on cognitive polyphasia and enculturation in the introduction (paragraph 3, page 1 in the original paper) to the Aims section on page 2, just before we outline our research questions. This provides a clearer conceptual framework for the review questions.

2. Please provide a formal concluding paragraph.

Response to Comment 2:

We have restructured the final paragraph (in the original paper) to incorporate a formal concluding paragraph (page 38).

Reviewer #2: The manuscript is well-written and scientifically-sound. The authors conducted a review to examine the lived experiences of chronic conditions among African communities in Europe and North America, and other countries in the Global North, focusing on established immigrant communities as well as recent immigrant, refugee and

asylum seeking communities. We were interested in meanings, experiences and illness action

from the perspective of individuals living with chronic conditions. The study is novel and will add to literature.

Response to general comment: We thank Reviewer 2 for describing our review as a ‘novel’ addition to the literature.

Decision Letter - Donovan Anthony McGrowder, Editor

How chronic conditions are understood, experienced and managed within African communities in Europe, North America and Australia: a synthesis of qualitative studies

PONE-D-22-22810R1

Dear Dr. Aikins,

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,

Donovan Anthony McGrowder, PhD., MA., MSc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor:

Dear Dr. Aikins,

The manuscript entitled “How chronic conditions are understood, experienced and managed within African communities in Europe, North America and Australia: a synthesis of qualitative studies” was revised in accordance with the reviewers’ comments and is provisionally accepted pending final checks for formatting and technical requirements.

Regards,

Dr. Donovan McGrowder (Academic Editor)

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Donovan Anthony McGrowder, Editor

PONE-D-22-22810R1

How chronic conditions are understood, experienced and managed within African communities in Europe, North America and Australia: a synthesis of qualitative studies

Dear Dr. de-Graft Aikins:

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. Donovan Anthony McGrowder

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 .