Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJune 30, 2023
Decision Letter - Pradip Chouhan, Editor

PONE-D-23-19791Exploring the Factors Behind Socioeconomic Disparities in Antenatal Care (ANC) Utilization across Five South Asian Nations: A Decomposition Approach.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. tohan,

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 Sep 30 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,

Pradip Chouhan

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

“We thank the MEASURE DHS Data Archive, ICF International, for providing access to the South and Southeast Asian Demographic and Health Surveys data. We also wish to express our appreciation to Khulna University Research and Innovation Center for providing the financing necessary to carry out this study. However, funders are not required in any way to participate in the study's design”

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.

3. 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.

4. 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 move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

5. Please upload a copy of Supporting Information Tables 1-5 which you refer to in your text on pages 5,9 and 10.

[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: Partly

**********

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: A section mentioning the Socioeconomic statuus of each of the population group in the five countries would be helpful.It may be included in the methodology section(Profile of the Study area ) as it would set the context of the study.

Reviewer #2: This manuscript examines very serious issue of public health as the authors indicate that there is a great variation in the utilization of antenatal care services among the five South Asian Nations. The present work shows that due to variation in the different socio-demographic aspects, the variations in the utilization of antenatal care services also found in the different countries. The manuscript used recent round of nationally representative database to assess the determining factors of utilization of antenatal care services. In my assessment, this manuscript highlighted some important findings which will help for policy implementations. However, the authors are suggested to minor revision in their manuscript. Comments are mentioned below:

1. The authors were taken at least four ANC visits during pregnancy as antenatal care variable in the present study but why not taken full ANC i.e. at least four ANC visits during pregnancy, at least two tetanus injections and at least 100 or more IFA tablets among the different South Asian countries?

2. The authors are suggested to add the rationality for the selection of five South Asian nations in the present study.

3. Women’s autonomy, mass media exposure and male involvement play a vital role for the utilization of antenatal care services among the women but in the present study the authors did not included in their model but why?

4. Discussion section need to be improve in proper manner.

5. I would like to emphasize that the paper needs to check for some typo errors, proofreading, and minor explanations as per the above suggestions.

**********

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: Parama Bannerji

Reviewer #2: 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.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: review.docx
Revision 1

5. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: A section mentioning the Socioeconomic status of each of the population group in the five countries would be helpful. It may be included in the methodology section (Profile of the Study area) as it would set the context of the study.

Thank you for your comment. We have added an additional section including those background information of the selected countries.

Reviewer #2: This manuscript examines very serious issue of public health as the authors indicate that there is a great variation in the utilization of antenatal care services among the five South Asian Nations. The present work shows that due to variation in the different socio-demographic aspects, the variations in the utilization of antenatal care services also found in the different countries. The manuscript used recent round of nationally representative database to assess the determining factors of utilization of antenatal care services. In my assessment, this manuscript highlighted some important findings which will help for policy implementations. However, the authors are suggested to minor revision in their manuscript. Comments are mentioned below:

Thank you for your comment and acknowledgment.

1. The authors were taken at least four ANC visits during pregnancy as antenatal care variable in the present study but why not taken full ANC i.e. at least four ANC visits during pregnancy, at least two tetanus injections and at least 100 or more IFA tablets among the different South Asian countries?

Thanks for your comment, we have categorized the ANC visit mothers who have taken at least four times ANC schooling accordingly by WHO definition. It is unclear to us or we didn’t find any definition that mother’s have to have at least two tetanus injections and at least 100 or more IFA tablets during pregnancy period. In addition, such information is not available in the DHS data set.

2. The authors are suggested to add the rationality for the selection of five South Asian nations in the present study.

Thank you for your comment we have added a section mentioning rationale for selecting those five countries in particular. (page 4)

3. Women’s autonomy, mass media exposure and male involvement play a vital role for the utilization of antenatal care services among the women but in the present study the authors did not included in their model but why?

Thank you for your observation, however we have considered women’s working status as an indicator of their autonomy and we found it significant for predicting ANC utilization. However, in our analysis, we encountered limitations in the available DHS data, particularly concerning variables like media exposure, which were incomplete or unavailable, particularly in Pakistan and Nepal. Regrettably, these variables had to be omitted from our study. However, future research endeavors could potentially address and incorporate these issues, thereby enriching our understanding of the complex factors influencing the utilization of Antenatal Care (ANC) services across these countries.

4. Discussion section need to be improve in proper manner.

We have tried to refine the discussion sections by incorporating robust supporting arguments and ensuring accurate referencing to existing knowledge.

5. I would like to emphasize that the paper needs to check for some typo errors, proofreading, and minor explanations as per the above suggestions.

We have thoroughly proofread this manuscript, diligently addressing and rectifying any potential typographical errors.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response List.docx
Decision Letter - Jay Saha, Editor

Exploring the Factors Behind Socioeconomic Inequalities in Antenatal Care (ANC) Utilization across Five South Asian Nations: A Decomposition Approach.

PONE-D-23-19791R1

Dear Dr. tohan,

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 Editorial Manager® 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,

Jay Saha

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: I have received satisfactory response from the author.

I hereby request ypu to accept the submission and publish it.

**********

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 - Jay Saha, Editor

PONE-D-23-19791R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. tohan,

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

Mr. Jay Saha

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 .