PONE-D-23-32084Emphasis should be placed on identifying and reporting research priorities to increase research value: an empirical analysisPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fei,

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.

==============================

However, before proceeding with publication, we kindly request that you address the following issues:

English Review: Please conduct a thorough English review of your manuscript to ensure clarity, coherence, and grammatical accuracy. This includes checking for proper sentence structure, punctuation, and word choice. We recommend seeking assistance from a proficient English speaker or a professional language editing service if necessary.

Minor Changes: Additionally, please make the minor revisions suggested by the reviewers. These may include clarifications, corrections of typographical errors, or adjustments to improve the flow of the manuscript.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 31 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,

Jose A. Calvache, MD, MSc, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear authors,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to you regarding the manuscript titled "Emphasis should be placed on identifying and reporting research priorities to increase research value: an empirical analysis" which you submitted to PLOS ONE. I want to thank you for choosing our journal as a platform for sharing your research findings.

After careful review by our editorial team and external reviewers, I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication pending minor revisions. We believe that your research contributes significantly to the field, and we appreciate the effort and dedication you have invested in this work.

However, before proceeding with publication, we kindly request that you address the following issues:

English Review: Please conduct a thorough English review of your manuscript to ensure clarity, coherence, and grammatical accuracy. This includes checking for proper sentence structure, punctuation, and word choice. We recommend seeking assistance from a proficient English speaker or a professional language editing service if necessary. PLOS suggests that you thoroughly copyedit our manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can 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.

Minor Changes: Additionally, please make the minor revisions suggested by the reviewers. These may include clarifications, corrections of typographical errors, or adjustments to improve the flow of the manuscript.

We believe that addressing these points will enhance the overall quality of your manuscript and facilitate the publication process. Once you have made the revisions, please submit the revised manuscript along with a detailed response to the reviewers' comments through our online submission system.

If you require any clarification or assistance during the revision process, please do not hesitate to contact us. We are here to support you and ensure a smooth publication experience.

Thank you once again for considering PLOS ONE for the dissemination of your research. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript and working with you towards its publication.

Yours sincerely,

[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

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: No

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: This manuscript highlights deficiencies in the reporting of research recommendations within Chinese clinical guidelines through a direct comparison of randomly selected GRADE (n=45) and Chinese (n=90) guidelines. The work has been done methodologically with structure and checking by consensus of 2 independent data extractors and nicely reported in tables and figures. The work is primarily descriptive but a useful foundation upon which Chinese guideline committees can address areas for improvement and elevation of their work to international standards.

My main criticisms relate to the grammatical/English language structure that makes it hard to read/understand.

In particular

lines 69-74 - too long, 2 'buts - break with a full stop

lines 81-84

lines 267 - 'another studies'

lines 279-284 - too long

lines 285-284 - needs re-phrasing

lines 311-315 - too long

Reviewer #2: I find the manuscript novel and interesting.

They carry out a broad review of other studies on the topic and show the lack of information on this specific topic.

The report of research priorities is investigated in a thorough manner (search for systematic information).

The presentation of the results is precise and organized. Despite the basic statistical treatment, the graphic presentation of the data is very good.

********** 

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: Yes: Craig Anderson

Reviewer #2: Yes: Hugo A. Mantilla-Gutierrez

**********

[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.

Emphasis should be placed on identifying and reporting research priorities to increase research value: an empirical analysis

PONE-D-23-32084R1

Dear Dr. Fei,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Jose A. Calvache, MD, MSc, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Acceptance of Your Submitted Paper

Dear Dr. Yutong Fei,

I am delighted to inform you that your paper titled "Emphasis should be placed on identifying and reporting research priorities to increase research value: an empirical analysis" has been accepted for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations on this significant achievement!

The reviewers and editorial team have thoroughly evaluated your submission and found it to be of high quality, making a valuable contribution. Your research methodology, analysis, and conclusions have been commended for their rigor and relevance.

We believe that your paper will make a meaningful impact on our readership and contribute to advancing knowledge in the field. Your dedication to producing quality research is truly commendable, and we are honored to have your work featured in our journal.

Thank you once again for choosing PLOS ONE as the platform for sharing your research findings. We look forward to your continued contributions and to seeing your paper online.

Warm regards,