Willingness to use mental health counseling in diverse groups of Asian Americans

Ronna Bañada; Yuri Jang; Lawrence A. Palinkas

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0306064

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 23, 2024
22 Mar 2024 Decision Letter - Pei Boon Ooi, Editor PONE-D-24-06927Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian AmericansPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Jang, 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. ============================== We have carefully studied and discussed your submission and we would like for the authors to address or highlight the below in the manuscript prior to the review process. Mental health attitudes and services can evolve rapidly, influenced by factors such as societal changes, cultural shifts, and policy developments. Hence, please justify the use of data from 2015: It may or may not be a limitation depending on how stable the factors under study are over time. Kindly justify this. The AAQoL survey may contain relevant information about the quality of life, cultural attitudes, and potentially attitudes towards mental health services among Asian Americans in central Texas. However, it's crucial to ensure that the survey adequately captures the factors relevant to the willingness to use mental health counseling, post pandemic. Kindly also highlight this in your revision. ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by May 06 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, Pei Boon Ooi, 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. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "The support for data collection was provided by the City of Austin’s Asian American Quality of Life initiative (Contract No. 26-8275-39, PI−Yuri Jang, Ph.D.). " We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that 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 support for data collection was provided by the City of Austin’s Asian American Quality of Life initiative (Contract No. 26-8275-39, PI−YJ, Ph.D.)." Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "The dataset is publicly available. https://data.austintexas.gov/City-Government/ Final -Repor t-of-the-Asian -Ameri can-Quali ty-of-Life/hc5t-p62z/data" Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 4.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. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r001
Revision 1
2 Apr 2024 Author Response March 27, 2024 Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. Academic Editor, PLOS One Dear Dr. Ooi, Enclosed is our revision of the manuscript entitled “Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian Americans.” We sincerely appreciate you, as the Academic Editor, and the Reviewers for the thoughtful comments on our work. This letter addresses how we responded to each of the concerns raised. Comments 1. Mental health attitudes and services can evolve rapidly, influenced by factors such as societal changes, cultural shifts, and policy developments. Hence, please justify the use of data from 2015: It may or may not be a limitation depending on how stable the factors under study are over time. Kindly justify this. Response: We sincerely thank the Reviewer for providing feedback to improve the manuscript and have made the necessary revisions. Given that the present study examined the general factors regarding mental health and service use using data collected before the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts should be made to revisit the conceptual model in consideration of societal changes and cultural shifts with the advent of the pandemic 2. The AAQoL survey may contain relevant information about the quality of life, cultural attitudes, and potentially attitudes towards mental health services among Asian Americans in central Texas. However, it's crucial to ensure that the survey adequately captures the factors relevant to the willingness to use mental health counseling, post pandemic. Kindly also highlight this in your revision. Response: We thank the Reviewer for this feedback and have revised the manuscript accordingly. It should be noted that the AAQoL data were collected in central Texas before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the current study addresses the general aspects of mental health service use that may not be specific to location and time. Additional Requirements: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. Response: We have made the corrections to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal’s style requirements. We added a “Conclusion” section and have made the corrections to the file name. 2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "The support for data collection was provided by the City of Austin’s Asian American Quality of Life initiative (Contract No. 26-8275-39, PI−Yuri Jang, Ph.D.). " We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that 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 support for data collection was provided by the City of Austin’s Asian American Quality of Life initiative (Contract No. 26-8275-39, PI−YJ, Ph.D.)." Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. Response: We have made the appropriate corrections and removed funding-related texts from the manuscript. 3. "The dataset is publicly available. https://data.austintexas.gov/City-Government/ Final -Repor t-of-the-Asian -Ameri can-Quality-of-Life/hc5t-p62z/data" Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. Response: We thank the Reviewer for bringing our attention to these needed corrections. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. 4. 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. Response: We have made the necessary corrections in the Funding Information section. We hope that these revisions improve our manuscript and we hope that you will find it suitable for publication in PLOS One. Sincerely yours, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r002
21 May 2024 Decision Letter - Pei Boon Ooi, Editor PONE-D-24-06927R1Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian AmericansPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Jang, 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. ==============================Dear authors:Thank you for your submission. There are minor concerns/suggestions which we invite you to take a look and revise accordingly. ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 05 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, Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. 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. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] 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 Reviewer #2: (No Response) ******** 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 Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: 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 Reviewer #2: 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 Reviewer #2: 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: This paper is good to publish. The outline in this paper is followed the structure of academic journal article. Author is organised well the content of the of study. However, there is a minor correction that need to perform by the author. Detail comments please refer to the attachment file. Reviewer #2: The study addresses a crucial issue of underutilization of mental health services in Asian American communities and offers valuable insights into the factors influencing their willingness to use mental health counselling. It contributes to the literature on mental health discrepancies and service utilization among Asian Americans. Introduction: - Comprehensive introduction and effectively introduces Andersen’s Behavioral Health Model and explains its relevance to understanding individuals’ willingness to use mental health counselling. - Only a few assertions were made without specific citations, for example, “due to the stigmatization of mental health issues…”, providing citations for the statement would be good. Method & Results: - The methodology part is well-structured. -This study also shows quite a careful consideration of the methodological issue in choosing logistic regression as the primary analytical technique. -The translation of the survey questionnaire into multiple languages is also a strength of the study. -The only concern is the use of data from 2015, and whether it is still relevant in capturing contemporary trends – further justification of its use is needed. Discussion & Conclusion: -The discussion gives useful inputs, particularly given the underrepresentation of this population in research. - The study also serves as a foundation for future research and intervention efforts aimed at promoting mental health literacy and culturally competent services within Asian American communities Overall, I find this manuscript relevant and timely. I recommend this manuscript for publication pending the authors' justification for the use of data from 2015. The clarification regarding the relevance and applicability of the data collected in 2015 is important to ensure the findings remain relevant/appropriate in the current context. Thank you. ****** 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: Yes: AP Dr Nor Mazlina Ghazali 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: Feedback on Journal Paper.pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r003
Revision 2
24 May 2024 Author Response May 24, 2024 Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. Academic Editor, PLOS One Dear Dr. Ooi, Enclosed is our revision of the manuscript entitled “Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian Americans.” We sincerely thank you and the two Reviewers for the thoughtful comments on our work. This letter addresses how we responded to each of the concerns raised. Comments from Reviewer #1 This paper is good to publish. The outline in this paper is followed the structure of academic journal article. Author is organised well the content of the of study. However, there is a minor correction that need to perform by the author. Detail comments please refer to the attachment file. Response: Thank you for the positive comment on our revision. The remaining issues have been thoroughly addressed. Abstract: The researcher is encouraged to insert the implication of study and suggestion to future researcher. Response: The section has been revised as below. Given the inverse association between mental health needs and the willingness to use mental health counseling, further attention should be paid to improving Asian Americans’ recognition of mental health symptoms and awareness of the benefit of mental health services. The enabling role of prior use of counseling also highlights the importance of increasing the exposure to mental health services for Asian Americans. In efforts to promote mental health literacy, reduce cultural stigma, and advocate mental health service use, consideration of cultural and linguistic diversity within the Asian American population is imperative. Introduction: In Introduction the researcher is encouraged to analyse the information provided in the introduction. It is not only using the information from literature review/previous study. Response: We would like to note that the introduction section is structured to overview the general literature on the topic and then guide the present investigation. The focus of the current study is on the role of mental health needs and prior use of mental health counseling, and we have structured the introduction section to highlight this uniqueness. Other related variables are included in the assessment as covariates, and we have also addressed their role in the discussion section. Research Methodology: - Researcher is encouraged to insert the term “Quantitative research design. - Researcher need to provide the type of sampling technique use in this study. - Researcher is also need to determine the number of sample size. - Be specific when you describe the test of data analysis. For instance: descriptive analysis (i.e.: percentage, frequency, mean etc.) and inferential analysis (if related) - Simplify your table of descriptive analysis - State AAQoL as instrument in measuring and please state clearly this survey used to measure what variable? Response: Each point has been addressed as below. - Research design: The following statement has been added: This study utilized a quantitative research design. - Sampling technique: The following statement has been added: The AAQoL survey primarily used a convenience sampling approach, and efforts were made to reflect the ethnic composition of the Asian American population in the area. - Sample size: The overall sample size of N = 2,609, as well as the sizes of the ethnic subgroups, is noted in the Data section. This information is also added to the heading for Table 1. - Test of data analysis: We have specified the test of data analyses, by noting that percentage was reported due to all study variables being in a binary or categorical format. We noted that ethnic group differences were evaluated by using Chi-square analyses. We noted that Spearman’s correlations among the study variables were calculated to understand their underlying associations and ensure the absence of collinearity. We noted that this process was done prior to the multivariate analyses. And noted that a series of logistic regression models were conducted using the overall sample. - Simplify your table of descriptive statistics: The readability of the descriptive table has been improved by changing its presentation. We have also added a note to describe the type of analysis. - AAQoL instrument: Detailed information on the AAQoL survey along with a citation has been provided. This study utilized a quantitative research design. Data came from the Asian American Quality of Life (AAQoL) survey, designed to explore the social and health needs of the growing population of Asian Americans in Central Texas [34]. The survey was conducted with self-identified Asian Americans aged 18 and older between February 1st to December 20th of 2015, in Austin, Texas. Discussion: Discussion on result is good, reliable and acceptable. Simplify your table of descriptive analysis. Response: We are glad to know that our discussion on findings is properly delivered. Please see our response to the comment on the descriptive table above. Comments from Reviewer #2 The study addresses a crucial issue of underutilization of mental health services in Asian American communities and offers valuable insights into the factors influencing their willingness to use mental health counseling. It contributes to the literature on mental health discrepancies and service utilization among Asian Americans. Response: The authors sincerely thank Reviewer #2 for their thoughtful input and insights to improve the clarity of the manuscript. We have made edits to address Reviewer #2’s comments. 1. Introduction: - Comprehensive introduction and effectively introduces Andersen’s Behavioral Health Model and explains its relevance to understanding individuals’ willingness to use mental health counselling. - Only a few assertions were made without specific citations, for example, “due to the stigmatization of mental health issues…”, providing citations for the statement would be good. Response: We appreciate Reviewer #2 for the positive comment on the Introduction section. In this revision, we have added relevant citations. For example, the citation below has been added to the statement on cultural stigma associated with mental health. Sanchez F, Gaw A. Mental health care of Filipino Americans. Psychiatric services. 2007 Jun;58(6):810-5. 2. Method and Results: - The methodology part is well-structured. - This study also shows quite a careful consideration of the methodological issue in choosing logistic regression as the primary analytical technique. - The translation of the survey questionnaire into multiple languages is also a strength of the study. - The only concern is the use of data from 2015, and whether it is still relevant in capturing contemporary trends – further justification of its use is needed. Response: While the AAQoL data from 2015 predates the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the variables it addresses, such as health and emotional well-being, are persistent and do not change rapidly. We believe that the methodological rigor and comprehensive nature of the AAQoL survey ensure that its findings remain relevant. These points are addressed in the statements in the methods and discussion sections as below. It should be noted that the AAQoL data were collected in central Texas before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the current study addresses the general aspects of mental health service use that may not be specific to location and time. Given that the present study examined the general factors regarding mental health and service use using data collected before the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts should be made to revisit the conceptual model in consideration of societal changes and cultural shifts with the advent of the pandemic. 3. Discussion & Conclusion: - The discussion gives useful input, particularly given the underrepresentation of this population in research. - The study also serves as a foundation for future research and intervention efforts aimed at promoting mental health literacy and culturally competent services within Asian American communities. Response: We appreciate Reviewer #2 for the positive comment on the discussion section. Overall, I find this manuscript relevant and timely. I recommend this manuscript for publication pending the authors' justification for the use of data from 2015. The clarification regarding the relevance and applicability of the data collected in 2015 is important to ensure the findings remain relevant/appropriate in the current context. Response: Please see our response above. We hope that these revisions improve our manuscript and we hope that you will find it suitable for publication in PLOS One. Sincerely yours, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r004
7 Jun 2024 Decision Letter - Pei Boon Ooi, Editor PONE-D-24-06927R2Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian AmericansPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Jang, 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. ==============================Thank you for submitting the revision and we have now hear back from the reviewers. Kindly help to address these comments and we shall then evaluate this submission accordingly.============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 22 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, Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. 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. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r005
Revision 3
7 Jun 2024 Author Response June 7, 2024 Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. Academic Editor, PLOS One Dear Dr. Ooi, Enclosed is our revision of the manuscript entitled “Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian Americans.” Below is a summary of our response to the reviewer’s comment provided in the attachment. 1. In abstract the researcher is encouraged to insert the implication of study and suggestion to future researcher. Response: We revised the abstract to include the following statements. Given the inverse association between mental health needs and the willingness to use mental health counseling, further attention should be paid to improving Asian Americans’ recognition of mental health symptoms and awareness of the benefit of mental health services. The enabling role of prior use of counseling also highlights the importance of increasing the exposure to mental health services for Asian Americans. In efforts to promote mental health literacy, reduce cultural stigma, and advocate mental health service use, consideration of cultural and linguistic diversity within the Asian American population is imperative. In Introduction the researcher is encouraged to analyse the information provided in the introduction. It is not only using the information from literature review/previous study. Response: We would like to note that the introduction section is structured to overview the general literature on the topic and then guide the present investigation. The focus of the current study is on the role of mental health needs and prior use of mental health counseling, and we have structured the introduction section to highlight this uniqueness. Other related variables are included in the assessment as covariates, and we have also addressed their role in the discussion section. We have also made recommendations for future research. Research Methodology - Researcher is encouraged to insert the term “Quantitative research design. - Researcher need to provide the type of sampling technique use in this study. - Researcher is also need to determine the number of sample size. - Be specific when you describe the test of data analysis. For instance: descriptive analysis (i.e: percentage, frequency, mean etc) and inferential analysis (if related) - Simplify your table of descriptive analysis - State AAQoL as instrument in measuring and please state clearly this survey used to measure what variable? Response: Each point has been addressed as below. - Research design: The following statement has been added: This study utilized a quantitative research design. - Sampling technique: The following statement has been added: The AAQoL survey primarily used a convenience sampling approach, and efforts were made to reflect the ethnic composition of the Asian American population in the area. - Sample size: The overall sample size of N = 2,609, as well as the sizes of the ethnic subgroups, is noted in the Data section. This information is also added to the heading for Table 1. - Test of data analysis: We have specified the test of data analyses, by noting that percentage was reported due to all study variables being in a binary or categorical format. We noted that ethnic group differences were evaluated by using Chi-square analyses. We noted that Spearman’s correlations among the study variables were calculated to understand their underlying associations and ensure the absence of collinearity. We noted that this process was done prior to the multivariate analyses. And noted that a series of logistic regression models were conducted using the overall sample. - Simplify your table of descriptive statistics: The readability of the descriptive table has been improved by changing its presentation. We have also added a note to describe the type of analysis. - AAQoL instrument: Detailed information on the AAQoL survey along with a citation has been provided. This study utilized a quantitative research design. Data came from the Asian American Quality of Life (AAQoL) survey, designed to explore the social and health needs of the growing population of Asian Americans in Central Texas [34]. The survey was conducted with self-identified Asian Americans aged 18 and older between February 1st to December 20th of 2015, in Austin, Texas. Discussion on result is good, reliable and acceptable. Simplify your table of descriptive analysis. Response: We are glad to know that our discussion on findings is properly delivered. We have also simplified our descriptive table and noted that all values reported in the table are percentages because our study variables are in a binary or categorical format. 5. Discussion is good and align with result. 6. Conclusion is good. Response: We appreciate the reviewer for the positive comment on the discussion and conclusion sections. We hope that these revisions improve our manuscript and we hope that you will find it suitable for publication in PLOS One. Sincerely yours, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r006
11 Jun 2024 Decision Letter - Pei Boon Ooi, Editor Willingness to Use Mental Health Counseling in Diverse Groups of Asian Americans PONE-D-24-06927R3 Dear Dr. Jang, 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, Pei Boon Ooi, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r007
Formally Accepted
20 Jun 2024 Acceptance Letter - Pei Boon Ooi, Editor PONE-D-24-06927R3 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Jang, 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 Dr. Pei Boon Ooi Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306064.r008

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 .