PONE-D-24-60531Acceptability of pre-exposure prophylaxis and associated factors among HIV-negative young men in Kagwara fishing community- Serere district: a cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Opito,

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 May 02 2025 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,

Adedotun Ogunbajo, 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 include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript.

3. 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.

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

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: No

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: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: Congratulations for working on a topic of public importance locally and internationally. You need to work on issue that I have highlighted them in the PDF manuscript file which I have attached.

-The study objectives do not line up well with the title of the study

-The methodology also lacks good clarity and some how is disorganized. Key issues like how calculation of PrEP acceptability was done is not clear.

Reviewer #2: Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. Young men are truly underserved and less is known about their needs concerning HIV prevention.

Below are some comments:

Title: Include Uganda

Key words: Review to HIV; pre-exposure prophylaxis; delete factors, include Uganda

Abstract: Line 22. Which PrEP is being referred to? Oral, Injectable? TDF/FTC, please clarify, also in the main background.

Line 25 include Uganda

Line 28: delete quantitative. Line 31.. Include statistics were

Line 38- include SD in full

Line 45: delete having concern. Wouldn't that be low acceptability/use of PrEP?

Conclusion, what strategies can be recommended for teh challenges identified?

Introduction

Line 54, update to UNSIDS 2024 data and reference

Line 59, include statistics

Line 64, the sentence starting with in addition is not clear whether it refers to communities or people

Line 67, delete sexually active. Those who use PrEP must be those that are sexually active

Line 68, delete high populations who..

Throughout the manuscripts probably refer to high risk young men instead of including HIV

Methods

Line 86- review to this was a cross sectional study.

Re-organize the whole section under sub sections: study design, site, population, data collection, analysis, etc.

Please include a section for participant recruitment to cater for information on how the young men were identified.

Line 95 and following, most of the information should be under participant recruitment. Study setting would include details about Serere and what activities take place in fishing communities, details about health care.

Line 106, provide details of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Exclusion should not necessarily be the opposite of the inclusion criteria.

Line 146, which activities?

Line 150- tested instead of turned?.. those who tested negative were interviewed using....

What is the KOBO tool? Any reference?

Line 158, which variables were fit to be included in the model? How was that determined?

Line 162, what was the level of significance?

For all the results in text, the percentages are actual, using the word about is misleading.

Results

Line 167 SD in full

Line 168 and following, there would be a focus on one side of the proportion instead of listing all.

Table 1: SD should have the Plus/minus symbol

Occupation, clarify on what business, peasant salaries stand for.

Line 176 and following, refer to illicit drug use instead of drugs of abuse/ addiction, etc,

Line 225, bivariate findings are not presented.

Line 237, table footer, what does adjusted for each other mean?

Line 277- review thoughts around window period..

Line 280- review factor was associated with no acceptability...

Line 284- need to provide youth friendly services?

Line 308-309 is a recommendation.

Line 319- among people eligible?

Line 328, any approval from UNCST?

Lines 330-332 are redundant.

Was assent obtained? Did the study recruit emancipated minors? Was parental consent obtained?

Lines 337, not easy to confirm that the place had no one else available. Please review. Line 338-340 is also redundant

Reference: Please include access dates for all web-based references.

Generally review grammar and sentence construction throughout the manuscript.

**********

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

**********

[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-24-60531 MANUSCRIPT HAVING REVIEW COMMENTS.pdf

Acceptability of pre-exposure prophylaxis and associated factors among HIV-negative young men in Kagwara fishing community- Serere district, Uganda: a cross-sectional study

PONE-D-24-60531R1

Dear Dr. Opito,

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,

Adedotun Ogunbajo, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: