PONE-D-22-18751Pesticide use safety practices and associated factors among farmers in fogera district wetland areas, south Gondar zone, Northwest Ethiopia 2021PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kassie,

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 Nov 26 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,

Haruna Musa Moda

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 suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. 

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

● The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

● A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

● A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear author,

Many thanks for considering PLOS One as platform to publish your work.

While the theme aligns with the journal objective, however it was concluded the work is not ready for submission hence will require further development. On this occasion a major revision has been recommended.

Best regards

[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: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: No

**********

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: 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: A) The English Language needs to be improved upon

B) Needs to get a recent edition of the PLOS ONE Journal to guide in i) presentation of results ii) discussions

C) Adhere to the PLOS ONE Template for listing references. (Refer to https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines)

i) Appropriate URL and DOI should be properly inserted

ii) Punctuation

iii) Justification

Reviewer #2: The manuscript describes original research on Pesticide use safety practices and associated factors among farmers in fogera district wetland areas, south Gondar zone, Northwest Ethiopia. The title will need reviewing to exclude 2021. The objectives of the study were clear. Manuscript has no line numbering and therefore difficult to provide feedback on specific lines. The study is interesting and would have like to see some level of reorganisation to enhance the specific impact of the study. Generally, the manuscript contains lots of grammatical errors, and some sections are unclear and difficult to read. I strongly recommend the authors check the grammar carefully and enhance the clearness of sentences throughout the manuscript. I will advice author to, if possible, use professional English language editors, if available.

Abstract will need reviewing, particularly, on the methods/procedures of the experiment to reflect order of processes presented in the main text. Overly, statistical analysis is what is presented in the methods and not sufficient of how data was collected. Why include 2021 in the objective, which is indicated as aim in the main text. Results is unclear as presented.

In the introduction, authors have defined pesticides as drug used for controlling and preventing pests, weeds, vectors, rodents, insects. Is this definition of pesticides as drugs, right? It would also be clearer for authors to indicate the different types of pesticides used for controlling weeds, rodents etc. Most part of the introduction is unclear due to grammatical issues. At the beginning of paragraph 2 of the introduction, authors referred to ‘international bodies taking up the issues and adopting a number of solutions. It is not clear which issues authors were referring to. Can this be clarified? Authors also indicated that ‘despite the efforts, global pesticide use has continued to grow steadily to 4.1 million tons per year in 2017. Would be useful for authors to indicate from which year to 2017. Reference is made to 7,362,493 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2016; however, the source citation provided was published in 2013. Authors should check and ensure this is right.

The materials and methods lack details in many sections. It would be useful to know the major crops grown by the study population as authors has indicated in the introduction that the few studies conducted Ethiopia on pesticide use only focuses on flower farm workers. Were illness the only exclusion criteria applied in selecting the study population? The procedure for arriving at the calculated sample size would need further explanation. In the qualitative studies, authors indicated the use of different groups of participants. What was the purpose of using these groups in addition to the farmers? How exactly was the study conducted using these groups; did the was the same questionnaire used as in the case of the farmers? Would be useful to see a sample of the questionnaire(s) used. Overall, the materials and methods require reviewing for clarity.

The results will need a general overhaul as in most cases, it is difficult to understand the results presented in-text and how they correspond with what is presented in the tables. Some of the terminologies used by authors will require further explanation. For example, if a participant desires to wash hands after spray; it does not mean the participant washes the hands. There are some important results presented in the tables but not highlighted intext by authors. For instance, storing pesticide in a kitchen, leaving empty containers on farm area etc. is a very serious safety issue but authors have ignored this in their analysis and discussion of the results. It is not clear what the paragraph under Qualitative finding of safety pesticide use practice mean.

There are few citations that are not included in the reference list. Reference list is up to 23, however, there are citations above that e.g., 26, 37 and 40. Authors should ensure all references are cited (in-text) and listed according to the journal requirements.

Overall, there are deficiencies in parts of the manuscripts which impacts on the reliability of the results reported and author have to address these. The manuscript can therefore not be published as it is. Authors will have to apply the suggestions indicated.

**********

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: John Gushit

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: PLUS One Reviews.pdf

Pesticide use safety practices and associated factors among farmers in fogera district wetland areas, south Gondar zone, Northwest Ethiopia 2021

PONE-D-22-18751R1

Dear Dr. Kassie,

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,

Haruna Musa Moda

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear Authors

Many thanks for taking time out to effect all corrections recommended.

I am happy to recommend the manuscript be accepted in its present form.

Best wishes

Haruna

Reviewers' comments: