A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19

Andrew L. Rainey; Song Liang; Joseph H. Bisesi Jr.; Tara Sabo-Attwood; Anthony T. Maurelli

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0284370

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 9, 2023
21 Mar 2023 Decision Letter - Vittorio Sambri, Editor PONE-D-23-03823A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Maurelli, 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. The manuscript has been carefully evaluated by two experts in the field and some suggestions have been made in order to increase the quality of your paper. I do agree with these indications and consequently I invite you to undertake this small revision process in order to improve your manuscript. Please submit your revised manuscript by May 05 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, Vittorio Sambri, M.D., Ph.D. 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 note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section. 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. Reviewers' comments: 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? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Reviewer #1: The paper face a very important problem for Wastewater Based Epidemiology. The used methods are appropriate and well explained, the literature updated. Some minor points to clarify: Did the sewershed population vary along the time, for example due to the summer holidays? Are cases reported as resident or present in the studied areas at the time of sampling? The length of the sewerage was not taken in account for fecal normalization: could it affect the results increasing the variability of fecal indicators load? Reviewer #2: The article titled: A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19" is a good, recent and very useful work. I recommend it for publication in your journal in a present form. ****** 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. 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: Annalaura Carducci Reviewer #2: Yes: Kamila Zdenkova ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284370.r001
Revision 1
23 Mar 2023 Author Response Editor’s Comments 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. Formatting edits have been made throughout the revised manuscript document. 2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section. This has been completed. 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. CDC NWSS data that was used for this study is publicly available and can be found at the following link: https://data.cdc.gov/Public-Health-Surveillance/NWSS-Public-SARS-CoV-2-Wastewater-Metric-Data/2ew6-ywp6 Reviewer #1: The paper face a very important problem for Wastewater Based Epidemiology. The used methods are appropriate and well explained, the literature updated. 1. Did the sewershed population vary along the time, for example due to the summer holidays? The reported population for each sewershed did not vary in this dataset and was reported constantly with the same population served value for all data points. This was noted in the track changed manuscript (Lines 257-260). 2. Are cases reported as resident or present in the studied areas at the time of sampling? CDC NWSS provided COVID-19 case data that was primarily collected and uploaded by each U.S. state. According to CDC, this data undergoes an additional quality check procedure to ensure accuracy of COVID-19 reporting (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/faq-surveillance.html). Our assumption throughout this study was that reported cases were for individuals that are residents within each key sewershed and presumptively present in that key sewershed geographic area during the duration of infection. 3. The length of the sewerage was not taken in account for fecal normalization: could it affect the results increasing the variability of fecal indicators load? While sewage travel time is a variable in our CDC NWSS dataset, it was only reported in 11% of the total data set, and only in two of the six study states (California and Ohio). Even among these two states, sewage travel time was not reported for all key sewersheds within each state. Currently, reporting states are not required to provide data for all variables of interest by CDC NWSS prior to upload for public use, which is why the majority of the data set has missing values for travel time. We did consider including sewage travel time when beginning this project. However, due to the above-mentioned limitations with the dataset, we decided not to include this variable in our study analysis. 2. Reviewer #2: The article titled: A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19" is a good, recent and very useful work. I recommend it for publication in your journal in a present form. This reviewer had no additional comments. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284370.r002
29 Mar 2023 Decision Letter - Vittorio Sambri, Editor A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19 PONE-D-23-03823R1 Dear Dr. Maurelli, 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, Vittorio Sambri, M.D., Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284370.r003
Formally Accepted
3 Apr 2023 Acceptance Letter - Vittorio Sambri, Editor PONE-D-23-03823R1 A multistate assessment of population normalization factors for wastewater-based epidemiology of COVID-19 Dear Dr. Maurelli: 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 Professor Vittorio Sambri Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284370.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 .