Transfer Alert

This paper was transferred from another journal. As a result, its full editorial history (including decision letters, peer reviews and author responses) may not be present.

Explaining the gender gap in mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic: a path analysis using structural equation modeling

PONE-D-22-22332

Dear Dr. Dotsikas,

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,

Prabhat Mittal, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

1. Please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

2. Please amend either the title on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the title in the manuscript so that they are identical

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

The topic covered by the authors of this paper is unquestionably important and is consistent with data on global mental health disturbance. The reasoning in the study is supported by sound theoretical precepts. Path analysis with mediation have been carried out and completes all its assumption. The manuscript can be accepted in the present form. 

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: 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 reviewed article explains the gender gap in mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic. The subject matter discussed by the article's Authors is undoubtedly essential and corresponds with mental health disruption worldwide statistics. The paper's argument is built on a proper theoretical basis and concepts. In the Methods section, the authors described exhaustively and in detail the materials and methods technique, research group, instrument, and analysis process. The statistical analysis is performed appropriately and rigorously. The obtained research results were presented clearly and compared with data from the literature. The conclusions correspond with the whole paper - refer to theoretical bases and research findings. Authors justify the need for intervention to address gender-based mental health inequalities exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic. The literature cited in the article is adequate for the subject. The bibliography contains 67 items. The selection of the literature proves good theoretical preparation for the study. The paper identifies scientific and practical implications. The manuscript is presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English. Minor typing errors require corrections. In conclusion, I recommend the reviewed article for publication.

Reviewer #2: the study investigates potential mediators in the relationship

between gender and mental health during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in the UK . General Health Questionnaire has been used to collect the data. the study evaluated four potential mediators in the relationship between gender and mental health, all of which were measured at the April Covid-19 wave. Hence the manuscript is technically sound and authenticated data sources has been used in the study. Findings are also inline with the analysis. Social implications are also clearly mentioned in the article.

**********

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: Dr.G.Kavitha

**********