Peer Review History

Original SubmissionSeptember 1, 2022
Decision Letter - Ender Senel, Editor

PONE-D-22-24450Social anxiety and academic performance during covid-19 according to gender, school year and use or non-use of masksPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Salas Sánchez,

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 Jan 15 2023 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,

Ender Senel, PhD

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. Please amend your current ethics statement to address the following concerns:

a) Did participants provide their written or verbal informed consent to participate in this study?

b) If consent was verbal, please explain i) why written consent was not obtained, ii) how you documented participant consent, and iii) whether the ethics committees/IRB approved this consent procedure.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

Acknowledgments: to the International University of La Rioja, for financing the project in which this research is framed, specifically, from the call for projects “Financing of UNIR Own Projects”, as well as to the educational center where the research was carried out

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." 

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. 

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

5. 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.

[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

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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

Reviewer #3: 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: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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: I think you have problems with timeliness and originality.When planning special works of ancient times, you evaluate the timeliness of your originality and originality qualities. Considering the Kovid effect, the use of masks and other vital processes could have made the study valuable. This version of the work is also valuable and meaningful, but I think it does not have an international level of quality and content.

Reviewer #2: Dear Authors,

Thank you very much for providing me the opportunity to read such an interesting article.

However, some concerns should be addressed before publication. See them here listed below:

- The title should be shortened according to the international writing guidelines.

- Lines 12-14. The phrase could be shortened to be more dynamic in reading.

- Line 71. There are two redundancies of the word "From".

- In the introduction. it is stated that there is a lack of literature on academic performance in COVID-19, but the article does not explain it. Although there is a lack of articles, it is needed to explain what is done and what may add this work as a plusvalue.

- Lines 101-104. It is needed to base this classification on previous authors.

- In table 1. It seems that there is missing information.

- Line 208. Please check the phrase.

- Line 218. Here you can say the surnames of the authors. Please check the Vancouver style to be more precise.

- Line 267-268 and 284. Please check the phrase to be grammatically correct.

- Line 297. The linker utilized is not the most suitable one. Please check.

Reviewer #3: -On page 9, Table 2 discusses sports and personal predictor variables. The reference to "sports variables" should be removed.

-Add sources in the introduction that show the relationship between social anxiety and academic performance.

-Argue in the first paragraph of the discussion why schoolchildren with high social anxiety worsened their overall grades in Physical Education.

-Delete on page 12 the names of citation 36: Miranda, Margoth, Pantoja and Valdivieso

**********

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: Yes: Alfonso Castillo Rodríguez

Reviewer #3: Yes: ALFONSO TRINIDAD MORALES

**********

[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 Reviewers,

Thanks for your suggestions in the improvement of the manuscript. The recommendations of the three reviewers have been followed. According to that, below you can see a list of the corrections that have been made:

Journal Requirements:

The participants gave their written informed consent. The document from line 123 to 128 talks about it.

The performance of the funders in the study has been included in the cover letter.

Reviewer 1

- To be more precise in the valuable insights of this study it was added in lines 39-42 the surplus of the study as well as in the last paragraph of the introduction.

- In lines 43- 67 it was stated the current state of art in mask usage and their impact.

- Considering the COVID effect it was added the period in which the study was carried out in the introduction. See lines 67-69.

- In addition, in the design section it was clarified the period in which the study was carried out to highlight that it was after lockdown and in a compulsory mask usage.

Reviewer 2

-The title was shortened according to the suggestion. Thanks so much.

- Lines 12-14. The phrase was shortened to be more precise.

- Line 71. It was used the word “in comparison to” to do not be redundant.

- In the introduction. It was added the surplus of the study in the lines 39-40 as well as in the last paragraph of the introduction.

- Lines 111-112. It was cited that the classification taken was from the following study:

22. Caballo VE, Arias B, Salazar IC, Calderero M, Irurtia MJ, Ollendick TH. Un nueva medida de autoinforme para evaluar la ansiedad/fobia social en niños: el "Cuestionario de ansiedad social para niños"(CASO-N24). Behavioral Psychology/Psicología Conductual. 2012;20(3):485-504.

- The table 1 was completed according to the suggestions made.

- The manuscript was revised to correct typos and to abide by the Vancouver style.

Reviewer 3

-The reference to "sports variables" in Table 2 has been removed.

-A quotation has been added in the introduction that show the relationship between social anxiety and academic performance.

-In the first paragraph of the discussion (218-223) has been discussed why schoolchildren with high social anxiety worsened their overall grades in Physical Education.

-The names of citation 36: Miranda, Margoth, Pantoja and Valdivieso have been removed.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Changes Letter.docx
Decision Letter - Ender Senel, Editor

SOCIAL ANXIETY AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE DURING COVID-19 IN SCHOOLCHILDREN

PONE-D-22-24450R1

Dear Dr. Salas Sánchez,

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,

Ender Senel, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Ender Senel, Editor

PONE-D-22-24450R1

Social anxiety and academic performance during COVID-19 in schoolchildren

Dear Dr. Salas Sánchez:

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. Ender Senel

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 .