Dear Dr. Li,

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 Jun 04 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.

• 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,

Jerritta Selvaraj

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: This study was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) (17H01016, 19K21813, and 21H04981 to M. Myo.; 22K20314 and 24K16785 to J.L.); a Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (19J15173 and 22J01448 to M. M.); a grant from the Center of Innovation Program, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JPMJCE1307 to M. Myo., JPMJCR21P4 to Y. N.); a grant from the Moonshot R&D Program, Japan Science and Technology Agency(JPMJMS2296, JPMJMS2307 to M. Myo., JPMJMS2292 to Y. N.); a grant from the Next Generation Artificial Intelligence Research Center of The University of Tokyo (“Circadian Patterns Analysis on Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) data of Infants and Their Caregivers” to J.L.); a donation from the Hama Gakuen Corporation and the Shoei Kosan Corporation (“Childhood Dietary Habits and Gut Microbiome” to M. Myo.); and a donation from the Chouyoukai (“Dietary Habits and Intestinal Microbiota during Infancy” to M. Myo.).   

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. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[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?

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: Authors made a review or critique of the study titled "Mother-child autonomic nervous system interaction as an indication of parental stress: 24-hour cross recurrence plot analysis.

These are the following research questions to answer by the authors

a. What is the primary objective of the study, and how does it address gaps in existing research on mother-child physiological interactions?

b. How does this study differ from previous research that focused on short-term, activity-based interactions?

c. What is the significance of using 24-hour at-home data for analyzing mother-child autonomic nervous system interactions?

d. Why were cross-recurrence plots chosen as the method for quantifying interactive patterns, and how do they capture the nonlinear dynamics of autonomic nervous system signals?

e. What key findings emerged from the study regarding the relationship between mother-child autonomic nervous system patterns and maternal parenting stress?

f. How do the day-to-night autonomic nervous system patterns, quantified through cross-recurrence plots, improve the prediction of maternal parenting stress compared to individual autonomic nervous system activity analysis?

g. What are the potential implications of these findings for understanding and addressing parental stress in real-world settings?

h. How might this research contribute to the development of interventions or tools for parents experiencing childcare stress?

i. What limitations might exist in using 24-hour at-home data and cross-recurrence plot analysis for this type of research?

j. What future research directions are suggested by the findings of this study, particularly in terms of exploring circadian rhythms and stress-related physiological interactions?

k. Are the concepts of "cross-recurrence plots" and "nonlinear dynamics of autonomic nervous system signals" clearly explained for readers unfamiliar with these methods?

l. How well does the abstract convey the complexity of the interplay between maternal and child autonomic nervous system activities?

m. What makes this study novel or significant in the field of parental stress and physiological interactions?

n. How does the study advance our understanding of the role of circadian rhythms in stress-related physiological interactions?

Reviewer #2: I would like to appreciate the work of the author. The paper looks good both technically and in standard quality.

Few suggestions can be included.

1. Improve the quality of the image as it looks blurred.

2. Most of the references are looking like older papers. Do check if they are really related papers.

**********

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:  Suganiya M

**********

[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: Reviewer Comments.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer comments.docx

Mother-child autonomic nervous system interaction as an indication of parental stress: 24-hour cross recurrence plot analysis

PONE-D-25-06809R1

Dear Dr. Li,

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,

Jerritta Selvaraj

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: The authors have made the required modifications. The manuscript presents a novel and methodologically interesting investigation into mother-child autonomic nervous system (ANS) dynamics using 24-hour ECG recordings and cross recurrence plot (CRP) analysis. The focus on dyadic physiological coupling as an indicator of parental stress adds significant value to both developmental psychophysiology and family health monitoring domains.

Reviewer #2: I would like to appreciate the work of the author. The paper looks good both technically and in standard quality. Paper is accepted as all the comments have been responded.

**********

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:  Suganiya

**********