PONE-D-24-21218The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Meng,

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 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,

Sadia Malik, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

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 financial disclosure: "This study was funded by Nantong Science and Technology Project, China (Grant number: MS22022113)."

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.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that " The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request."

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well.

5. 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. 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: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: ID: PONE-D-24-21218

Title: The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursing

Thank you for providing a chance to review this manuscript.

Detailed information:

Keywords："mental health" should read "Mental health".

Abstract

Line 28 - 38, page 2: Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, with spaces before and after "=" and "<".

Overall: The abstract requires a brief overview of the background, purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of the article. What's your conclusion?

Introduction

Line 61 - 63, page 4: “hospitals and many healthcare centers strive to fulfill patients' needs through the provision of quality services” Is it possible to give some relevant examples so that readers can understand.

Line 76 - 77, page 4: “Emergency departments have a distinct advantage in influencing a patient's initial perception as they navigate through the healthcare system” How is the emergency department different from other departments and can it be explained?

Method

Study design and participants

Line 98 - 103, page 5: Are all tertiary hospitals in the area included?

Line 99, page 5: “November 10 to December 30, 2023.” When were the surveys of nurses and patients respectively conducted? Please be specific.

Line 102, page 5: “only Grade III hospitals were selected” Why choose more than just secondary hospitals? Why choose only tertiary hospitals? What are the advantages of tertiary hospitals over other levels of hospitals for this study?

Line 104, page 5: Why were emergency department nurses used as survey respondents? And not other unit nurses? How is the emergency department different from other departments?

Line 104 - 108, page 5: “with at least one year of working experienc”“nurses who had taken a leave for more than six months in the previous year due to different reasons” Why the one-year and six-month timeframes? Is there a basis for this? If so, please explain.

Line 129 - 130, page 7 - 8: 1) Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text. 2) Please use a 3-wire meter. 3) Personally, I don't think there is a great need to set up a table to account for this information, and it's fine to account for it directly in the body of the text.

Demographic information

Line 131 - 135, page 8: Is a demographic table available? If not, it is recommended that a demographic table be drawn up so that the demographic characteristics of nurses and patients are displayed more clearly.

Nursing care satisfaction scale

Line 138 - 139, page 8: The result of the application? Good or bad? Please elaborate.

Line 143, page 8: “Cronbach's α coefficient” Note that the full name is alpha.

Statistical analysis

Line 164 - 169, page 9: 1) chi-square test requires italics. Please correct.

Line 170 - 172, page 10: What is the recommended range to which these values apply? What is the literature on which they are based? Please provide details.

Results

Line 174, page 10: Are 532 nurses and 532 patients the final sample size? Were there any missing samples during the survey? How were the missing samples handled?

Overall: 1) Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text. 2) My suggestion is to divide it into subheadings according to the content of the research.

There are some problems in this article: 1) punctuation conforms to the use of incorrect; 2) much of the content is not detailed enough; 3) there are some logical errors.

Thank you and my best,

Your reviewer

Reviewer #2: This article is a good and high quality work. Also, Its topic is interesting for researchers. The methodology and method is sound. Study recommendations are useful. Hence in my opinion, this manuscript is eligible for publication.

My decision: Accept

**********

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: Yes: Dr. Esmail Khodadadi

**********

[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.

The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursing

PONE-D-24-21218R1

Dear Dr. Meng,

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,

Sadia Malik, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: