Patient satisfaction and patient accessibility in a small fiber neuropathy diagnostic service in the Netherlands: a single-center, prospective, survey-based cohort study

PONE-D-23-42238

Dear Dr. Geerts,

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. Vara Prasad Saka

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

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

“I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Janneke G.J. Hoeijmakers reports a grant from the Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds (W.OK17-09), outside the submitted work.

Catharina G. Faber reports grants from European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant for PAIN-Net, Molecule-to-man pain network (grant no. 721841), grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, grants from Grifols and Lamepro for a trial on IVIg in small fiber neuropathy, other from Steering committees/advisory board for studies in small fiber neuropathy of Biogen/Convergence and Vertex, outside the submitted work.

Ingemar S.J. Merkies reports grants and non-financial support from Grifols, grants from Lamepro, during the conduct of the study; other from Participation in steering committees of the Talecris ICE Study, CSL Behring, LFB, Novartis, Octapharma, Biotest and UCB, outside the submitted work.”

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).  If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your updated Competing Interests statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

2. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

Additional Editor Comments:

Thank you for submitting your manuscript with Manuscript ID PONE-D-23-42238 to PLOS ONE. After a thorough review by the assigned reviewers and careful consideration, I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication.

I appreciate the quality of your work and believe it will contribute positively to PLOS ONE.

Congratulations on your accepted manuscript, and I look forward to seeing it published.

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 research work carried out authors by was technically sound good, used proper statistical methods which are suitable for this type of study design. The Way authors presented the work was satisfied.

Manuscript can be accepted without any revisions

Reviewer #2: I would like to appreciate the authors attempt to provide a detailed report on SFN and Patient satisfaction. Results indicated that overall a significant improvement in health status. But i have one question that why the authors couldn't addressed the cost effective analysis on SFN? Because these conditions are chronic and would impact the socioeconomic status of the family.

**********

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: Phani Kumar Kola

**********