Psychological distress, employment, and family functioning during the COVID-19 outbreak among recent immigrant families in Israel: Moderating roles of COVID-19 prevalence

Tae Kyoung Lee; Maya Benish-Weisman; Saskia R. Vos; Maria Fernanda Garcia; Maria C. Duque Marquez; Ivonne A. Calderón; Tatiana Konshina; Einat Elizarov; Seth J. Schwartz

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0277757

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 11, 2022
5 Sep 2022 Decision Letter - Maria Elisabeth Johanna Zalm, Editor PONE-D-22-04347Psychological distress, employment, and family functioning during the COVID-19 outbreak among recent immigrant families in Israel: Moderating roles of COVID-19 prevalencePLOS ONE Dear Dr. Lee, 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. Your manuscript has been reviewed by two peer-reviewers and their reports are appended below. The reviewers commented that the manuscript requires further discussion regarding the reasoning for studying migrant populations in particular, and how these groups may be differently affected than the native population. Furthermore, the reviewers comment that the discussion and limitations of the study are expanded, for example to clarify how representative the study is for the whole migrant population. The reviewers have recommended a number of citations as a part of their review. We would recommend that you thoroughly evaluated these requested references and determine whether the articles are relevant to the current study. You may feel free to disregard references with tangible relevance to the study reported in the manuscript. Could you please revise the manuscript to carefully address the concerns raised? Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 19 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, Maria Elisabeth Johanna Zalm, Ph.D Editorial Office 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 include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. [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: No ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: The manuscript is written fluently and covers u particularly interesting topic. However, it is believed that the introductory part should also be expanded with other research developed at that time i other countries to better understand the phenomenon of family dynamics. By way of example, some work carried out in Italy at that time and recently published, in them can be found a rich and appropriate international literature Rania, N., Parisi, R., & Lagomarsino, F. (2022). Mothers and Workers in the Time of COVID-19: Negotiating Motherhood within Smart Working. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 1-31 doi.org/10.1177/08912416221075833. Rania, N., Coppola, I., Lagomarsino, F., & Parisi, R. (2022). Family well-being during the COVID19lockdown in Italy: Gender differences and solidarity networks of care. Child & Family Social Work ,27(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.1286710. The analyses are conducted with methodoligical riogre, however, the presence of a higher percentage of mothers should be taken into account when discussing the limitations of the work. Reviewer #2: This contribution is well-written and thorough. However, the main focus – determining how the covid-19 pandemic is related to the functioning of migrant families is not sufficiently well motivated and empirically studied. The main points of criticism are stated below: - The theoretical arguments that are presented in the paper are generic and applicable to any group/ general population. I miss specific arguments of why should we study the migrant population (beyond the number in the entire population) and how the reaction to the pandemic might differ for this group as compared to native populations. - Following that, I would suggest including the native population as a comparison group, to disentangle the difference. I am not sure, however, whether the data permits it. Alternatively, one can focus on this one group only and use more migration-specific arguments and indicators to show what is distinct about migrants’ situation. - The contribution lacks links to the migration literature, and especially – transnationalism. Migrants who have migrated 5 years prior to the study and are in their 40-ies, might still have close ties to the family members living in the country of origin, especially parents (or did the parent generation migrate along?). Stress about elderly parents living abroad, with limited possibility to go and visit can be a stressful event for migrants and can affect their family life during the time of the global pandemic. Does the data set contain any information that would allow disentangling of those mechanisms? - The authors use convenience sample – how representative is it for the whole migrant population? Is there a way to say anything about that? - The conclusions about designing possible interventions to deal support migrant families in the time of the pandemic seem also very generic and applicable to general population. Again, what is so unique about this group, that does not apply to native population? ****** 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. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Review PONE-D-22-04347.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277757.r001
Revision 1
20 Oct 2022 Author Response Reviewer #1: Comment 1: It is believed that the introductory part should also be expanded with other research developed at that time other countries to better understand the phenomenon of family dynamics. By way of example, some work carried out in Italy at that time and recently published, in them can be found a rich and appropriate international literature. Rania, N., Parisi, R., & Lagomarsino, F. (2022). Mothers and Workers in the Time of COVID-19: Negotiating Motherhood within Smart Working. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 1-31. doi.org/10.1177/08912416221075833. Rania, N., Coppola, I., Lagomarsino, F., & Parisi, R. (2022). Family well-being during the COVID19 lockdown in Italy: Gender differences and solidarity networks of care. Child & Family Social Work ,27(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.1286710. Response: To understand better the family dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic, we have now added international literature that the reviewer suggested (see page 3): “Some studies have begun to examine the impacts of COVID-19-related risks on family functioning among families in the U.S. [2] and Europe [3, 4]. For example, a recent study indicated that Italian families reported high levels of stress and tension during the COVID-19 pandemic [4]. However, less is known about COVID-19 effects on families in other countries outside the U.S. and Europe.” Comment 2: The analyses are conducted with methodological rigor, however, the presence of a higher percentage of mothers should be taken into account when discussing the limitations of the work. Response: In the revised manuscript, the high percentage of mother participants was acknowledged in the limitation section (see page 24): “Fifth, the study sample was comprised primarily of mothers (87.5%). It is thus important to remain cautious when interpreting the results. For future study, it is important to replicate the results with a sample including more fathers.” Reviewer #2: Comment 3: The theoretical arguments that are presented in the paper are generic and applicable to any group/ general population. I miss specific arguments of why we should study the migrant population (beyond the number in the entire population) and how the reaction to the pandemic might differ for this group as compared to native populations. Response: We agree that the findings of the study may be applicable to general populations given that such populations also have COVID-19-related risks (e.g., family financial strains) which can lead to negative effects on family functioning (e.g., family communication) [1]. However, previous studies have suggested that migrant populations, compared to native populations, may be more stressed due to additional pressures such as cultural stress (perceived discrimination and/or acculturative stress) in the context of COVID-19 [2], and that these pressures may exert more negative effects on family functioning. Importantly, less is known about effects of COVID-related risks among recent immigrant families. More importantly, as we mention in the manuscript, most recent studies have examined the impacts of COVID-19-related risks on family functioning among families in Westernized counties (such as the U.S. [2] and Europe [3, 4]). Therefore, to improve external validity (generalizability), we need to understand the effects of COVID-related risks on family functioning among immigrant populations outside of westernized countries. Accordingly, we examined effects of various COVID-19 stressors on family functioning among recent immigrant families in Israel. We have briefly summarized this in the introduction (see pages 3 and 4). “Some studies have begun to examine the impacts of COVID-19-related risks on family functioning among families in the U.S. [2] and Europe [3, 4]. For example, a recent study indicated that Italian families reported high levels of stress and tension during the COVID-19 pandemic [4]. However, less is known about COVID-19 effects on families in other countries outside the U.S. and Europe.” “Further, a recent study [5] suggests that recent immigrant families in Israel are more vulnerable to COVID-19 related risks (e.g., higher levels of COVID-19 distress) compared to native-born Israeli families. Taken together, it is important for prevention scientists to understand how various COVID-19 related factors impacts family functioning among recent immigrant families from the FSU in Israel.” References 1. Hussong AM, Midgette AJ, Richards AN, Petrie RC, Coffman JL, Thomas TE. COVID-19 Life Events Spill-Over on Family Functioning and Adolescent Adjustment. J Early Adolesc. 2022;42(3):359-388. doi:10.1177/02724316211036744 2. Kim Y, Lee H, Lee M. Social Support for Acculturative Stress, Job Stress, and Perceived Discrimination Among Migrant Workers Moderates COVID-19 Pandemic Depression. Int J Public Health. 2022;67:1604643. Published 2022 Aug 5. doi:10.3389/ijph.2022.1604643 Comment 4: Following that, I would suggest including the native population as a comparison group, to disentangle the difference. I am not sure, however, whether the data permits it. Alternatively, one can focus on this one group only and use more migration-specific arguments and indicators to show what is distinct about migrants’ situation. Response: Unfortunately, a host national sample was not included when the data was collected. We now mention this in the limitation section (see page 24). “Sixth, the current study did not collect native-born families in Israel. Therefore, we do not know how our findings might have differed among recent immigrant families, as compared to native-born families, in Israel.” Comment 5: The contribution lacks links to the migration literature, and especially – transnationalism. Migrants who have migrated 5 years prior to the study and are in their 40-ies, might still have close ties to the family members living in the country of origin, especially parents (or did the parent generation migrate along?). Stress about elderly parents living abroad, with limited possibility to go and visit can be a stressful event for migrants and can affect their family life during the time of the global pandemic. Does the data set contain any information that would allow disentangling of those mechanisms? Response: Unfortunately, we did not collect the data that the reviewer suggested. For future studies, these migration-related variables should be examined in detail. We mentioned this possibility on page 24. “Seventh, stress about elderly parents living abroad, with limited possibilities for visitation, can serve as a stressful event for migrants and can affect their family life during global pandemics. In future studies, this possibility should be examined in detail.” Comment 6: The authors use convenience sample – how representative is it for the whole migrant population? Is there a way to say anything about that? Response: As the reviewer mentioned, we collected the data through convenience sampling strategies. We do not know how representative our sample may be vis-à-vis the migrant population in Israel as a whole. However, the sampling was conducted from all over Israel from different cities and settlements (we mentioned this on page 8). We briefly mentioned this possibility on page 24. “Eighth, although we sampled families throughout Israel, we collected the data through convenience sampling methods. We do not know how representative our sample may be vis- à-vis the population of migrant families in Israel.” Comment 7: The conclusions about designing possible interventions to deal support migrant families in the time of the pandemic seem also very generic and applicable to general population. Again, what is so unique about this group, that does not apply to native population? Response: Migrant families face increased challenges in adjusting to a new environment. These families are exposed to more stressors due to the changes in social and cultural norms. Therefore, they may require mental health services such as individual or family counseling, as well as help finding work following the pandemic. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277757.r002
3 Nov 2022 Decision Letter - Ali B. Mahmoud, Editor Psychological distress, employment, and family functioning during the COVID-19 outbreak among recent immigrant families in Israel: Moderating roles of COVID-19 prevalence PONE-D-22-04347R1 Dear Dr. Lee, 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, Ali B. Mahmoud, Ph.D. 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 #1: 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 ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: 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 ****** 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 ****** 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: The authors have revised the manuscript according to the reviewers' instructions, the article is greatly improved, and I therefore consider it ready for publication ****** 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: No ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277757.r003
Formally Accepted
7 Nov 2022 Acceptance Letter - Ali B. Mahmoud, Editor PONE-D-22-04347R1 Psychological distress, employment, and family functioning during the COVID-19 outbreak among recent immigrant families in Israel: Moderating roles of COVID-19 prevalence Dear Dr. Lee: 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. Ali B. Mahmoud Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277757.r004

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 .