PONE-D-24-08261Integrated environmental and clinical surveillance for the prevention of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in indoor environments and vulnerable communities (Stell-ARI): ProtocolPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Atomsa,

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.

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

1.‎ Discussion” section should be revised basically. It is not suitable for a manuscript. ‎The ‎manuscript needs more adequate discussion with supporting latest references. ‎

‎2.‎ In the discussion section, the potential limitation of the study should be highlighted and ‎in ‎the conclusion, novel insight should be clearly highlighted.‎ ‎

‎3.‎ It is also recommended to discuss and explain what should be the appropriate policies based ‎on the findings of this literature.‎

‎4.‎ Please make sure your conclusions and future perspectives section underscores the ‎scientific value-added of your paper and/or the applicability of your results. ‎

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

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 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,

Sara Hemati

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 authors acknowledge support from the Lagrange Project of the Institute for Scientific Interchange Foundation (ISI Foundation) funded by Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Torino (Fondazione CRT). DP was supported by the VERDI project (101045989), funded by the Horizon Europe programme of the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the Health and Digital Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting  authority can be held responsible for them. LD and CC were supported by Fondation Botnar."

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: 

"This project is funded by the National Government of Italy through the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) 'Italy Tomorrow', which is part of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) programme. The NRRP aims to address the economic and social impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic crisis while addressing structural weaknesses in the Italian economy and promoting ecological and environmental transition.

The Tuscany Health Ecosystem (THE), coordinated by the University of Florence, aligns with the NRRP's focus on 'Life Sciences', fostering growth in Tuscany's life sciences sector through collaboration between public and private entities to address innovation needs. THE comprises 10 Spokes, with our study falling under Spoke 2 (Preventive and Predictive Medicine), led by the University of Pisa's Department of Biology, in collaboration with other departments.

In accordance with the NRRP, the Research and Innovation Programme "THE - Tuscany Health Ecosystem" has a 36-month eligibility period, commencing on 01/12/2022 and extending no later than 28/02/2026. Investment Line 1.5 allocates funding for the creation and/or strengthening of 12 Innovation Ecosystems (THE) across the national territory. This specific project falls under Spoke 2 (Preventive and Predictive Medicine), with project code I53C22000780001 with a budget of 1,308,657.86 €.

The funders (The Italian Government) had no involvement in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. 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. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

The research question outlined is expected to address a valid academic problem or topic and contribute to the base of knowledge in the field.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses?

The manuscript should describe the methods in sufficient detail to prevent undisclosed flexibility in the experimental procedure or analysis pipeline, including sufficient outcome-neutral conditions (e.g. necessary controls, absence of floor or ceiling effects) to test the proposed hypotheses and a statistical power analysis where applicable. As there may be aspects of the methodology and analysis which can only be refined once the work is undertaken, authors should outline potential assumptions and explicitly describe what aspects of the proposed analyses, if any, are exploratory.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable?

Descriptions of methods and materials in the protocol should be reported in sufficient detail for another researcher to reproduce all experiments and analyses. The protocol should describe the appropriate controls, sample size calculations, and replication needed to ensure that the data are robust and reproducible.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. 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 and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

(Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: ‎1.‎ Discussion” section should be revised basically. It is not suitable for a manuscript. ‎The ‎manuscript needs more adequate discussion with supporting latest references. ‎

‎2.‎ In the discussion section, the potential limitation of the study should be highlighted and ‎in ‎the conclusion, novel insight should be clearly highlighted.‎ ‎

‎3.‎ It is also recommended to discuss and explain what should be the appropriate policies based ‎on the findings of this literature.‎

‎4.‎ Please make sure your conclusions and future perspectives section underscores the ‎scientific value-added of your paper and/or the applicability of your results. ‎

Reviewer #2: I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your manuscript and believe it holds significant potential for publication. Your detailed methodology, clear objectives, and comprehensive approach to integrating various data streams are truly commendable. This study has the potential to greatly enhance our understanding and management of ARIs in enclosed environments, making a valuable contribution to public health.

Congratulations on your excellent work, and thank you for your valuable contribution to the field. I have no additional comments or suggestions for improvement. I highly recommend this manuscript for publication.

**********

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

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.

Integrated environmental and clinical surveillance for the prevention of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in indoor environments and vulnerable communities (Stell-ARI): Protocol

PONE-D-24-08261R1

Dear Dr. Carducci%,

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,

Sara Hemati

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: