Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 24, 2023
Decision Letter - Amitava Mukherjee, Editor

PONE-D-23-30694The use of ultraviolet light generated from light-emitting diodes for the disinfection of transvaginal ultrasound probesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Yasir,

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 08 2024 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,

Amitava Mukherjee, ME, 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. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified 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.

3. 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)

4. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 

“There is no competing interest. Lumicare One holds the right of this device.”

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

 This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. 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.

6. Thank you for stating the following in the Funding Section of your manuscript:

“This research was funded by Lumicare, Sydney, Australia.”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

7. 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: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

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: The results of the studies “The use of ultraviolet light generated from light-emitting diodes for the disinfection of transvaginal ultrasound probes” are predictable. UVC radiation is effective in removing microorganisms. The presented conclusions are of practical importance, therefore I propose to improve some aspects of the manuscript.

1. Line 187, 244, 298, 301, 302 What is the purity of reagents? Where do the reagents come from? The reagents must be described in sufficient detail.

2. How many repetitions of the experimental measurements were performed?

3. Give the name and version of any software used, e.g. in Statistical Analysis

4. I recommend adding Bacteria Detection Images to the manuscript. This visualization will complement the study.

5. Some samples are missing from the experiment description, e.g. Sample 2, 3, 4, .... What does this mean? Are these reference tests?

**********

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

**********

[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

Comment 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.pdfandttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

Reply: The authors have carefully formatted the manuscript according to PLOS One guidelines.

Comments 2. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified 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.

Reply: Patients consent was obtained on consent forms that included their names and signatures. We have written this statement in method section in detail.

Comment 3. 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. 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).

Reply: Professor Mark D.P. Willcox edited the revised manuscript for English. All the changes in the revised manuscript are highlighted red with track changes the revised manuscript and another clean copy of manuscript is also provided.

Comment 4. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section:

“There is no competing interest. Lumicare One holds the right of this device.” Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now. This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Reply: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Please change this in the online submission form on the authors behalf.

Comment 5. 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.

Reply: Sorry, this is our mistake. There is no repository information that need to be supplied. I have supplied all the information with my manuscript. Please correct this on the authors behalf.

Comment 6. We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work”. Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Reply: Sorry for inconvenience. Yes, this is correct that “This research was funded by Lumicare, Sydney, Australia”. Please update this information online submission form.

Comment 7. 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.

Reply: We have written ethics statement in the method section and deleted from elsewhere in the manuscript.

 Response to Reviewer

Reviewer 1:

Reviewer #1: The results of the studies “The use of ultraviolet light generated from light-emitting diodes for the disinfection of transvaginal ultrasound probes” are predictable. UVC radiation is effective in removing microorganisms. The presented conclusions are of practical importance; therefore I propose to improve some aspects of the manuscript.

Reply: Thank you for appreciation our work. We have addressed the reviewer comment comments and added the information’s in the revised manuscript.

Comments: 1. Line 187, 244, 298, 301, 302 What is the purity of reagents? Where do the reagents come from? The reagents must be described in sufficient detail.

Reply: 1. We have provided purity (where applicable) and the source of each reagent in detail, please see in the revised manuscript:

1. Page # 7, Line # 187-189: autoclaved sterile phosphate buffered saline (PBS; 8 g NaCl, Ajax Finchem, AUS; 0.2 g KCl, Ajax Finchem, AUS; 1.4 g Na2HPO4, Chem Supply, AUS; 0.24 g KH2PO4, Chem Supply, AUS; purity of each ≥ 99 %, in 1000 mL of milli Q water).

2. Page # 10, Line # 245-246: (Oxoid, Basingstoke, UK) supplemented with MnSO4.H2O (500 ppm, Sigma-Aldrich, MO, USA, purity ≥ 99 %).

3. Page # 12, Line # 298-303: (BSA; Bovovgen Biologicals, Vic, AUS, purity ≥ 99%) and washed horse red blood cells (RBCs; Bovovgen Biologicals, Vic, AUS, purity ≥ 99% ), in two different combinations: Clean Condition with BSA (0.3 g ) in 100 mL of diluent (Tryptone 1 g; Basingstoke, UK; sodium chloride 8.5 g, Ajax Finchem, AUS; purity of each ≥ 99% in 1000 mL of water) and Dirty Condition with 3 g of BSA (Bovovgen Biologicals, Vic, AUS)

4. Page # 12, Line # 298-303: (magnesium chloride19.48 g; Chem supply, SA, AUS and sodium bicarbonate 35.02 g; Sigma, St, Louis, USA, purity of each ≥ 99 %, in 1000 mL of water)

Comments: 2. How many repetitions of the experimental measurements were performed?

Reply: Each experiment was in performed in duplicate. Please see in the revised manuscript Page # 13, Line # 315.

Comments: 3. Give the name and version of any software used, e.g. in Statistical Analysis

Reply: Graph pad prism 8 version 8.0.2 was used for statical analysis and written in revised manuscript (Page # 13, line# 307-308).

Comments: 4. I recommend adding Bacteria Detection Images to the manuscript. This visualization will complement the study.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestions. We have included following figure in the manuscript. (Page # 14).

Figure 3. Detection of bacteria on chocolate blood agar. Figure 3A-C represent the bacterial colonies on the plate of non-UVC treated probe while Figure 3D-F represent the bacterial colonies on the plates of UVC treated probe.

Comments: 5. Some samples are missing from the experiment description, e.g. Sample 2, 3, 4, .... What does this mean? Are these reference tests?

Reply: We apologies for inconvenience. We have clarified this in the revised manuscript by adding the information’s in the Table legend.

Please see Page # 13, line# 307-308. “The table only includes sequentially listed sample numbers (1-30) that exhibited bacterial growth while those sample numbers were omitted where bacterial growth was absent”.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Amitava Mukherjee, Editor

The use of ultraviolet light generated from light-emitting diodes for the disinfection of transvaginal ultrasound probes

PONE-D-23-30694R1

Dear Dr. Yasir,

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,

Amitava Mukherjee, ME, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. 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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. 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

**********

5. 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

**********

6. 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 manuscript has been much strengthened by the additional data. All the concerns of mine are solved in the revised manuscript.

**********

7. 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

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Amitava Mukherjee, Editor

PONE-D-23-30694R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Yasir,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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 Dr. Amitava Mukherjee

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 .