PONE-D-24-29223A primary school-based dengue solution model for post-COVID-19 in southern Thailand: Students understanding of the dengue solution and larval indices surveillance systemPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Suwanbamrung,

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 Nov 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,

Marianne Clemence, Staff Editor, on behalf of,

Rajib Chowdhury, M.Sc.; MPH

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 financial disclosure: The project was funded by the Excellent Centre for Dengue and Community Public Health (EC for DACH) and School of Public Health, Walailak University.

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. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: We would like to acknowledge all participants in Keawsan subdistrict, including the SAO officials, PCUs, the households, family leaders, VHVs, CDCs, community leaders, teacher, student and Nabon district public health officials. This work was supported by the Community

Public Health Program at the School of Public Health, Walailak University. This research was financially supported by EC for DACH, School of Public Health, Walailak University, and Keawsan subdistrict SAO, Thailand. They did not have any role in the study design, data collection analysis and interpretation, or in writing the manuscript.

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

The project was funded by the Excellent Centre for Dengue and Community Public Health (EC for DACH) and School of Public Health, Walailak University.

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

4. In the online submission form, you indicated that data will be made available on 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.

5. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

6. 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: 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: No

**********

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: The weakness of the article is sampling. purposive based on what inclusion criteria ? Why gender is significant different , is their any explanation or biasness. Authors can provide the tools as a supplement materials . Covid lockdown result in bad impact on dengue control , is it evidence enough by your study findings .

Reviewer #2: The research paper titled "A Primary School-Based Dengue Solution Model for Post-COVID-19 in Southern Thailand: Students' Understanding of the Dengue Solution and Larval Indices Surveillance System," by Jiraporn Jaroenpoola and colleagues, presents an intriguing and valuable model for preparedness and response in unprecedented situations. This model could be useful if it could be effectively replicated in other regions.

I have the following suggestions for enhancing the manuscript:

Abstract:

The abstract should concisely summarize the manuscript’s key findings, presenting them clearly and comprehensively. Revise the abstract by highlighting the most significant outcomes and selecting the most relevant keywords. Consider removing "Aedes aegypti" and instead focus on keywords that directly reflect the main findings and themes of the study.

Background:

Introduction to Dengue Virus Infection: A brief introduction to dengue virus infection outlines its significance as a public health concern, particularly in tropical and subtropical regions like Southern Thailand.

Current Situation of Dengue Virus Infection: Discuss dengue infections in Thailand overall and Southern Thailand, including any recent trends or data post-COVID-19. Highlight the challenges that have emerged due to the pandemic's impact on public health systems.

Need for a Dengue Solution Model: Explain why there is an urgent need for an innovative dengue solution model over another existing model, particularly in the context of primary schools. I suggest emphasising the importance of larval indices surveillance as a key component of this model and its potential to mitigate dengue transmission in the community.

Justification and Knowledge Gaps: I suggest providing a rationale for the current study by identifying gaps in contrast to existing research and knowledge. Justify the need for this research by explaining how it addresses these gaps and contributes to the understanding and control of dengue in post-COVID-19 settings.

Is there a decreased number of dengue cases in ASEAN countries directly linked with the movement of people or the reporting system since Singapore did not experience as with other ASEAN countries?

Methods:

Selection of Primary Schools: Justify the selection of the four primary schools included in the study. Provide criteria or reasoning that guided this selection, such as the geographical location, dengue risk levels, or previous history of dengue outbreaks. How do the investigators select leader and non-leader groups?

Pre-testing of the Developed Questionnaire: Elaborate on the pre-testing process of the developed questionnaire. Explain how this process ensured the reliability and validity of the data collection tool, and how it was tailored to the context of the study.

Integration of the Dengue Model: Describe how the dengue solution model was integrated into the school-based setting. Discuss the steps taken to ensure that the model was both practical and adaptable to the needs of the students and the school environment.

Assurance of Model Effectiveness: Outline the methods used to evaluate and validate the effectiveness of the developed and adapted dengue control model. Provide details on how the model’s success was measured and any criteria used to assess its impact.

Evaluation of the Dengue Control Model: Clarify whether the study evaluated the dengue control modelling method and, if so, describe the evaluation process in detail, including the tools and indicators used to measure its success.

Results:

Presentation of Findings: Construct a 2x2 table to present the major findings of the study in a clear and concise format and tables Summarize key outcomes, focusing on the most significant results rather than getting bogged down in excessive detail.

What was the impact of the study on the parents and the family members?

Discussion:

Is there any previous study Comparison with Previous Studies: Compare the findings of this study with previous research conducted on similar topics. Highlight any similarities or differences and provide logical explanations for any discrepancies observed between this study and existing literature.

Limitations:

Study Limitations: Discuss the limitations of the study, including any constraints or potential biases that could affect the findings. Be transparent about these limitations to provide a balanced view of the study's strengths and weaknesses.

Suggestions for Future Research: Offer suggestions for how these limitations could be addressed in future research. Identify areas where further investigation is needed to build on the findings of this study. Is there a further expansion of the study in other areas?

Implementation Challenges: Address any potential barriers to implementing the recommendations from this study. Propose feasible and actionable solutions to overcome these challenges, ensuring that the findings can be effectively translated into practice.

Recommendations: It would be very useful if the authors could provide recommendations to the community, the municipal government and relevant stakeholders.

Reviewer #3: The study "A primary school-based dengue solution model for post-COVID-19 in southern Thailand: Students understanding of the dengue solution and larval indices surveillance systemis" is the result of rigorous research that provides useful information for those working in the education and prevention of dengue and other communicable diseases. The researchers applied appropriate methodologies to achieve the objectives, as it is a mixed-methods study with both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The analyses are detailed and apply relevant statistics to each case, and the results are correctly expressed. The figures and tables provide sufficient and easy-to-understand information. The sample size is adequate, and although some participants dropped out of the study, the analysis was still completed. The results adequately characterize the study population and provide evidence for the conclusions.

The statistical analysis is the best developed part of the manuscript.

The researchers propose an interesting model that is valid for dengue prevention in primary school children, however it would be useful if they described the limitations they found in developing the training of children and the recommendations to increase the impact of the model or the adjustments they would suggest to achieve percentages higher than 80% in all aspects of dengue prevention.

Most of the references are appropriate, but I have pointed out three changes in the citation in the text (see annex)

Apply reference to this statement from the introduction section: The movement of individuals over national borders is the main factor contributing to the spread of both COVID-19 and dengue infection, which increases the likelihood of a continuous outbreak.

And

In the first paragraph of the discussion: This can be explained by the Aedes mosquito's diurnal adaptation to stagnant or stored water, which occasionally attracts children.

Find the reference to the vector biology study, which determines the diurnal biting behavior for Aedes, and therefore change citation number 26 (N. Javed, H. Ghazanfar, S. Naseem. Knowledge of Dengue Among Students Exposed to Various Awareness Campaigns in Model Schools of Islamabad: A Cross-Sectional Study. Cureus 10 (2018) e2455. DOI 10.7759/cureus.245)

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Ariful Basher

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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-24-29223_reviewerR.pdf

A primary school-based dengue solution model for post-COVID-19 in southern Thailand: Students understanding of the dengue solution and larval indices surveillance system

PONE-D-24-29223R1

Dear Dr. Suwanbamrung,

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,

Rajib Chowdhury, M.Sc.; MPH

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: