The awareness of public about the Emergency Medical Services in the Eastern region of Saudi Arabia

Ahmed Alanazy; Abdullah Alruwaili; Saleh Alswaidan; Hassan Alobaid; Ahmed Alomran; Abdulkarim Hzazi; Ibrahim Alhussain; Meshal Alharbi; Meshary Binhotan

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0306878

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 5, 2023
19 Dec 2023 Decision Letter - Othman A. Alfuqaha, Editor PONE-D-23-35051The Awareness of Public about the Emergency Medical Services and It is Association Factors in the Eastern Region of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional StudyPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Alanazy, 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 Feb 02 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, Othman A. Alfuqaha, 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 (1) whether consent was informed and (2) 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. If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information. 3. Note from Emily Chenette, Editor in Chief of PLOS ONE, and Iain Hrynaszkiewicz, Director of Open Research Solutions at PLOS: Did you know that depositing data in a repository is associated with up to a 25% citation advantage (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230416)? If you’ve not already done so, consider depositing your raw data in a repository to ensure your work is read, appreciated and cited by the largest possible audience. You’ll also earn an Accessible Data icon on your published paper if you deposit your data in any participating repository (https://plos.org/open-science/open-data/#accessible-data). 4. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Before we proceed with your manuscript, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board, etc.). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. You also have the option of uploading the data as Supporting Information files, but we would recommend depositing data directly to a data repository if possible. We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide. 5. Please amend your list of authors on the manuscript to ensure that each author is linked to an affiliation. Authors’ affiliations should reflect the institution where the work was done (if authors moved subsequently, you can also list the new affiliation stating “current affiliation:….” as necessary). 6. Please include a caption for figure 2. 7. Please include a copy of Table 3 which you refer to in your text on page 8 of 13. 8. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 4 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. Additional Editor Comments: Dear authors, Thank you for your submission. After careful review, the reviewers have provided valuable feedback on your paper. It is strongly recommended that you carefully consider and address their comments in order to proceed in a positive direction. Additionally, I encourage you to take into account my own comments to further enhance your paper and strengthen its overall quality. Editor Comments: Title: Shorten the title to no more than 15 words for conciseness. Abstract: Include details about your data collection methods such as whether you used random, snowball, or convenience sampling. Introduction: Clarify whether the deficiency in public awareness of EMS is specific to Eastern Saudi Arabia, the entire Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or if it extends globally. Broaden the scope in the introduction. Contributions: Introduce a paragraph outlining the unique contributions of your study and compare them with findings from previous research. Method Section: Provide more information on how you conducted the inline survey, ensuring it is clear how participants from the Eastern region or other countries were able to respond. Validity of Scales: Consider adding construct validity measures such as correlations, KMO, Bartlett's test of sphericity, and total variation in addition to content validity and reliability. Figures: Consolidate figures to present gender and educational levels in a single chart for clarity. Typos: Carefully review and correct any typos present in the manuscript. Discussion: Begin the discussion section with a focus on your main findings rather than repeating the study's aims. International Comparisons: Compare your results with findings from international studies to highlight key differences. References: Double-check and ensure the accuracy of your references. We appreciate your commitment to revising your manuscript. Best of luck in this revision journey. Sincerely, Dr. Alfuqaha [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 Reviewer #3: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: I Don't Know Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: 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 Reviewer #3: 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: No Reviewer #3: 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: • Underline number 60 and kindly change from “aged between 18 and 60” to “aged between 18 and 60 years” • Kindly add exclusion criteria • How consent was taken for participation in the survey • Kindly clarify how the survey population were identified for the survey • How selection bias was minimized in the survey • Please scan your manuscript again and correct some topological errors • Please make sure your manuscript was written in line with this journal submission guideline Reviewer #2: Thank you for inviting me to review this interesting paper which aim to explore the to assess the extent of knowledge regarding EMS within the 53 Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. The authors did well in obtained the required ethical approval, conducting the study, and reporting the data. In summary, there is need for more awareness public initiatives to increase awareness about EMS. The paper address important gap in the literature and provide a base for staring initiatives in increase the level of awareness in public. However, the manuscript needs further editing to improve readability for the readers. - Abstract needs editing – for example it would be help full to present the general awareness before presenting the contributing factors such as age, gender, and degree. - The objective in the introduction presents the study design when authors mentioned “our cross-sectional study …etc.” it would be better to move to the method section. - Power calculation is fine and adequate try to replace the website link by the software used to calculate the sample size. - I do not get the grasp from figure 1 for the gender difference. - Presenting the psychometric properties for the questioner could be confusing. Need more clarification for example how did authors measure reliability (time frame – usually we used 2 weeks intervals between each administration process). I suggest remove the reliability if the questionnaire is valid in measuring what is intended to measure. - I suggest Knowledge based analysis must be presented first. Then, other factors that can explain the awareness. - In the logistic regression I would recommend focusing on the adjusted model. Although, the intercepts in tables must be clear in a separate raw. - Sort the repetition in the manuscript. for example, the aim of the study was introduced gain in the discussion. Good luck in your revision Reviewer #3: 1. How the author will make sure that this survey was not done by healthcare staff? 2. How the author will compare between male and female participants about "Emergency Number 112 Awareness" although P value is 0.37 (nonsignificant), Actions when encountering EMS or EMT (P value= 0.62) and Role of a Dispatcher (P value= 0.56) 3. Author mentioned Figures 1 and Figure 2 but there is no "Figure 2" ****** 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: No Reviewer #3: 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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306878.r001
Revision 1
16 Apr 2024 Author Response Comment Authors Reply Journal Requirements: 1) Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The manuscript was edited according to the provided model 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 (1) whether consent was informed and (2) 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. The consent details were added 3) Please include a caption for Figure 2. Caption was added 4) Please include a copy of Table 3 which you refer to in your text on page 8 of 13. Table was added 5) We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 4 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. The table number was edited Editor Comments: 1) Title: Shorten the title to no more than 15 words for conciseness. The title was shorten Abstract: Include details about your data collection methods such as whether you used random, snowball, or convenience sampling. The sampling technique was added to the abstract and in the method section Introduction: Clarify whether the deficiency in public awareness of EMS is specific to Eastern Saudi Arabia, the entire Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or if it extends globally. Broaden the scope in the introduction. Introduce a paragraph outlining the unique contributions of your study and compare them with findings from previous research. The introduction has been updated Method Section: Provide more information on how you conducted the inline survey, ensuring it is clear how participants from the Eastern region or other countries were able to respond. Added Figures: Consolidate figures to present gender and educational levels in a single chart for clarity. our decision to present educational levels with gender distribution aligns directly with our study's objective to assess gender differences in EMS awareness. This approach is crucial to our analysis, providing a nuanced understanding of the interplay between gender and education in the context of EMS knowledge. Typos: Carefully review and correct any typos present in the manuscript. The manuscript was checked Discussion: Begin the discussion section with a focus on your main findings rather than repeating the study's aims. International Comparisons: Compare your results with findings from international studies to highlight key differences. the dissection has been updated References: Double-check and ensure the accuracy of your references. Checked Reviewer #1 comments 1) Underline number 60 and kindly change from “aged between 18 and 60” to “aged between 18 and 60 years The word “years” was added 2) Kindly add exclusion criteria The exclusion criteria were added 3) How consent was taken for participation in the survey The consent details were added 4) Kindly clarify how the survey population were identified for the survey 5) How selection bias was minimized in the survey Details regarding the survey population identification were added 6) Please scan your manuscript again and correct some topological errors 7) Please make sure your manuscript was written in line with this journal submission guideline The manuscript was edited according to PLOS ONE criteria Reviewer #2 Comments 1) Abstract needs editing – for example it would be help full to present the general awareness before presenting the contributing factors such as age, gender, and degree. The awareness was introduced first. 2) The objective in the introduction presents the study design when authors mentioned “our cross-sectional study …etc.” it would be better to move to the method section. This sentence was edited accordingly. 3) Power calculation is fine and adequate try to replace the website link by the software used to calculate the sample size. This site has no related software 4) I do not get the grasp from figure 1 for the gender difference. The figure number was edited 5) Presenting the psychometric properties for the questioner could be confusing. Need more clarification for example how did authors measure reliability (time frame – usually we used 2 weeks intervals between each administration process). I suggest remove the reliability if the questionnaire is valid in measuring what is intended to measure. We conducted the reliability test to enforce our study. 6) I suggest Knowledge based analysis must be presented first. Then, other factors that can explain the awareness. The awareness was introduced first. 7) In the logistic regression I would recommend focusing on the adjusted model. Although, the intercepts in tables must be clear in a separate raw. The we prefer to keep both models to provide a comprehensive overview. The intercepts in tables are already in separate cells. 8) Sort the repetition in the manuscript. for example, the aim of the study was introduced gain in the discussion. The manuscript was reviewed and repetition was removed. Reviewer #3 Comments 2) How the author will compare between male and female participants about "Emergency Number 112 Awareness" although P value is 0.37 (nonsignificant), Actions when encountering EMS or EMT (P value= 0.62) and Role of a Dispatcher (P value= 0.56) While the p-values were non-significant, our study's findings contribute to the broader understanding of emergency response awareness and behavior, suggesting the need for further exploration of gender-related factors. 3) Author mentioned Figures 1 and Figure 2 but there is no "Figure 2" The figure number was edited Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306878.r002
26 Jun 2024 Decision Letter - Othman A. Alfuqaha, Editor The Awareness of Public about the Emergency Medical Services in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia PONE-D-23-35051R1 Dear Dr. 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, Othman A. Alfuqaha, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Congratulations on your diligent efforts. Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306878.r003
Formally Accepted
2 Jul 2024 Acceptance Letter - Othman A. Alfuqaha, Editor PONE-D-23-35051R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Alanazy, 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. Othman A. Alfuqaha Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306878.r004

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 .