Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 5, 2022
Decision Letter - Gayathri Delanerolle, Editor

PONE-D-22-27546Estimating the effect of anticipated depression treatment-related stigma on depression remission among people with depression in MalawiPLOS ONE

Dear Dr, Dussault,

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 the Feb 02 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.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dr Gayathri Delanerolle

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 include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript.

3. 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.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please delete it from any other section.

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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 study explored the role of treatment-related stigma in depression care by estimating the effect of patients’ baseline anticipated treatment-related stigma on their 3-month probability of depression remission when newly identified with depression.

This work makes important contributions to the literature regarding the public mental health issues.

However, the manuscript can be further strengthened by some reframing of the introduction, addition of further details regarding the methods, and clarification of study findings. I have provided additional details below.

Since the participants in this study are all patients with chronic diseases, it is suggested that the author should make it clear in the title that this research group is NCD patients with depressive symptoms, rather than "people with depression" as currently described.

Abstract:

It should be clarified that this study is based on cohort study design.

In methods of abstract, the author stated that this study measured the data at four time points, but only analyzed the data after the third month in the text, which makes readers confused. I can understand that the data of this manuscript comes from a large research project and the observation at four time points is the design of the parent study. If the data in this manuscript does not use the follow-up data at the last two time points, it is recommended to modify this description in the abstract to avoid misunderstanding.

Introduction:

There are some descriptions of the limitations of existing literature around mental illness stigma. However, the rationale for studying this topic in Malawi specifically could be bolstered. Specifically, additional support is needed for why you explored a series of confounding factors in method section (P9, line 131-159)? The main confounding factors considered in this study should be justified in the background.

Methods:

Interesting that the author considered multiple psychosocial indicators as confounding factors, but did not mention participants' chronic diseases, such as NCD condition and other physical health related characteristics.You could link this more clearly to the limitations section which discusses the overall healthiness of your study population.

Please omit the following sentences, “In general, this sample of participants had high levels of baseline social support and post-traumatic stress symptoms (P12, line 28-219).” And instead describe the actual findings presented in Table 1.

Moreover, because the author did not describe the assessment method of social support and PTSD symptoms in method section, there is no basis for how to judge the "high level" here.

Result

The presentation of Table 2 is a bit confusing. It is suggested that the author present demographic characteristic variables together. Then it can be considered to put the observed variables after the baseline and three-month follow-up into a table and list them by two columns for comparison.

I think Table S3 can present the main results better than Table 3.

Discussion

As the author stated (in the methodology section), the stigma experienced by the participants was different from the anticipated stigma. However, I didn't see the author mention in the discussion what kind of targeted intervention should be adopted against the “anticipated treatment-related stigma”in this study. And, whether it is necessary to design and intervene the content of this type of stigma from the perspective of patients themselves, rather than reducing the discriminatory attitude towards community people in general? Please clarify.

**********

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

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

We thank the reviewer for their thoughtful review. Please see the attached document "Response to Reviewers" for details on how we addressed reviewer feedback in this revised manuscript.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Gayathri Delanerolle, Editor

Estimating the effect of anticipated depression treatment-related stigma on depression remission among people with noncommunicable diseases and depressive symptoms in Malawi

PONE-D-22-27546R1

Dear Dr Dussault,

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,

Dr Gayathri Delanerolle

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Gayathri Delanerolle, Editor

PONE-D-22-27546R1

Estimating the effect of anticipated depression treatment-related stigma on depression remission among people with noncommunicable diseases and depressive symptoms in Malawi

Dear Dr. Dussault:

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. Gayathri Delanerolle

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 .