Association of dietary vitamin E intake with peripheral arterial disease: A retrospective cross-sectional study

Qiang Liu; Xing Wu; Yun Wang; Xiang Wang; Fei Zhao; Jianjun Shi

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0320356

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJune 11, 2024
11 Jun 2024 Author Response https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r001
1 Nov 2024 Decision Letter - Hasan Durmus, Editor PONE-D-24-23667Association of dietary vitamin E intake with peripheral arterial disease: A retrospective cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Liu, 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 Dec 16 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, Hasan Durmus 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. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. The American Journal Experts (AJE) (https://www.aje.com/) is one such service that has extensive experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. Please note that having the manuscript copyedited by AJE or any other editing services does not guarantee selection for peer review or acceptance for publication. Upon resubmission, please provide the following: The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a supporting information file) A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new manuscript file)” 3. 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. 4. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate ""supporting information"" files [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: Partly ******** 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: 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: 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: This is a population study whose methodology was presented in a coherent and well-founded manner, thereby providing a robust foundation for the authors' findings. The following considerations pertain to adjustments: 1. The acronym "ABI" should be written in full for the first time it is mentioned in the text. 2. While the methods of the primary study are duly referenced, it is nevertheless necessary to provide a detailed account of the methodology employed for the assessment of vitamin E consumption in this manuscript. Please indicate the number of 24-hour dietary recalls utilized in the study. Please clarify whether vitamin E intake was corrected for energy. It would be beneficial to ascertain whether the participants were taking a vitamin E supplement. 3. As noted, Reference 14 examined the same population and investigated the correlation between vitamin E intake and DAP. In what ways does your study differ from that of Reference 14? 4. The majority of the references utilized in this study are old, with 80% of them published more than five years ago. It is recommended that more current references be cited, particularly those used in the discussion to support the relationship between vitamin E consumption and DAP. 5. In line 228, the text makes reference to "recent studies," yet no corresponding reference is provided. Please provide the references for these recent studies. 6. The observational, cross-sectional study does not define a causal relationship. It is therefore advisable to exercise caution when considering the phrase "These findings should be used when formulating clinical guidelines." 7. The extant literature indicates that the isolated consumption of vitamin E does not provide cardiovascular protection. This is evidenced by the fact that studies that used supplementation did not observe the same results as observational studies. It is therefore of interest that this topic is introduced for discussion. Reviewer #2: It is a well-written but incomplete article. Language editing is strongly recommended. Professional language support is recommended. In addition to the grammar check, the statistical as well as grammatical reasons why certain methods are favoured should be elaborated. ****** 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-24-23667_reviewer NO.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r002
Revision 1
26 Dec 2024 Author Response Dear Editor and Reviewers: On behalf of my co-authors, we greatly appreciate the careful review and comments from both you and the reviewers. We believe that by implementing the suggested changes, we now have a stronger manuscript entitled “Association of dietary vitamin E intake with peripheral arterial disease: A retrospective cross-sectional study” for submission to Journal of PLOS ONE. We look forward to your positive response to the revised work submitted here. We present here point-to-point responses for each of the comments in the attached document and have revised our manuscript accordingly. We do not change our statistics or results. And we hope the revised manuscript could be acceptable to you. Revised sections are identified with red text in the paper. There are no conflicts of interest regarding this work. All authors have read the revised manuscript and approved its submission to the journal “PLOS ONE”. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. Thank you and best regards. Yours Sincerely, Jianjun Shi mail: 13934282361@163.com Department of Cardiovascular Surgery,Taiyuan Central Hospital; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, the Ninth Clinical College Affiliated to Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan,030000, China. Responds to the reviewer’s comments: Reviewer #1: Dear Reviewer, Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your comments have greatly helped to improve the quality of our manuscript. Comments: This is a population study whose methodology was presented in a coherent and well-founded manner, thereby providing a robust foundation for the authors' findings.The following considerations pertain to adjustments: 1. The acronym "ABI" should be written in full for the first time it is mentioned in the text. 2. While the methods of the primary study are duly referenced, it is nevertheless necessary to provide a detailed account of the methodology employed for the assessment of vitamin E consumption in this manuscript. Please indicate the number of 24-hour dietary recalls utilized in the study. Please clarify whether vitamin E intake was corrected for energy. It would be beneficial to ascertain whether the participants were taking a vitamin E supplement. 3. As noted, Reference 14 examined the same population and investigated the correlation between vitamin E intake and DAP. In what ways does your study differ from that of Reference 14? 4. The majority of the references utilized in this study are old, with 80% of them published more than five years ago. It is recommended that more current references be cited, particularly those used in the discussion to support the relationship between vitamin E consumption and DAP. 5. In line 228, the text makes reference to "recent studies," yet no corresponding reference is provided. Please provide the references for these recent studies. 6. The observational, cross-sectional study does not define a causal relationship. It is therefore advisable to exercise caution when considering the phrase "These findings should be used when formulating clinical guidelines." 7. The extant literature indicates that the isolated consumption of vitamin E does not provide cardiovascular protection. This is evidenced by the fact that studies that used supplementation did not observe the same results as observational studies. It is therefore of interest that this topic is introduced for discussion. Comment 1: The acronym "ABI" should be written in full for the first time it is mentioned in the text. Respond 1: Thank you for the valuable suggestion. Firstly, as suggested by you, the abbreviation ABI has been written in full and explained before its first use; Secondly, PAD is defined in the last sentence of the paragraph. As follows: Ankle-brachial index Systolic blood pressure measurements were taken from the right arm (brachial artery) and both ankles (posterior tibial artery) after a brief period of rest. If the participant's right arm measurements were unavailable due to any conditions that could affect accuracy, such as open wounds or dialysis shunts, the left arm was used for the brachial pressure measurement. Individuals aged 40-59 had their systolic blood pressure measured twice, while those aged 60 and older had it measured only once. The ankle-brachial index (ABI) was calculated by dividing the average systolic blood pressure (ASBP) of the ankle by the ASBP in the arm. For participants aged 60 and older, the single reading represented the mean values. ABI <0.9 was used to define PAD. Comment 2: While the methods of the primary study are duly referenced, it is nevertheless necessary to provide a detailed account of the methodology employed for the assessment of vitamin E consumption in this manuscript. Please indicate the number of 24-hour dietary recalls utilized in the study. Please clarify whether vitamin E intake was corrected for energy. It would be beneficial to ascertain whether the participants were taking a vitamin E supplement. Respond 2: Thank you for the detailed review. Firstly,based on your this comment, we have added a description of the methodology used to assess vitamin E intake. Furthermore, in this study, the intake of vitamin E was not energy-adjusted, and this limitation has been addressed in the discussion. In addition, data related to vitamin E intake in diets was gathered from the NHANES 1999 to 2004 first-day dietary interview examination files. This interview captured details of all foods and beverages consumed within a 24-hour duration, such as consumption time, eating occasion, food descriptions, portion sizes, food sources, and location of consumption,and did not contain vitamin E supplement . As follows: Data related to vitamin E intake in diets was gathered from the NHANES 1999 to 2004 first-day dietary interview examination files. A 24-hour dietary recall interview was conducted via the NHANES computer-assisted dietary data interview system to acquire detailed dietary intake data for all participants. This interview captured details of all foods and beverages consumed within a 24-hour duration, such as consumption time, eating occasion, food descriptions, portion sizes, food sources, and location of consumption. Following the dietary recall, a set of health-related inquiries were made. The data collection approach utilized the Automated Multiple Pass Method, which is the dietary data collection tool of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Comment 3: As noted, Reference 14 examined the same population and investigated the correlation between vitamin E intake and DAP. In what ways does your study differ from that of Reference 14? Respond 3: Thank you for the detailed review. The differences between my study and Reference 14 are as follows: 1. My study provides a research flowchart, demonstrating the design rationale of the study; 2. My study includes curve fitting graphs, making the study results more intuitive; 3. The covariates in my study include age, sex, race, marital status, education, physical activity, income, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, body mass index, total cholesterol, and HbA1c, enhancing the reliability of the study; 4. My study further strengthens the stability of the results through subgroup analysis and forest plots. These are all significant improvements that can enhance the scientific rigor and credibility of the study. Comment 4: The majority of the references utilized in this study are old, with 80% of them published more than five years ago. It is recommended that more current references be cited, particularly those used in the discussion to support the relationship between vitamin E consumption and DAP. Respond 4: Thank you for the valuable suggestion. Based on your advice, the references in the study have been updated and supplemented, with literature published within the last 5 years accounting for 45.2%. However, the literature on the relationship between vitamin E and PAD published in the past 5 years is limited. 2.Zhang Z, Chen Z. Higher Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index is Associated With Higher Likelihood of Peripheral Arterial Disease. Ann Vasc Surg. 2022;84:322–6. 5.Zhu K, Qian F, Lu Q, Li R, Qiu Z, Li L, et al. Modifiable Lifestyle Factors, Genetic Risk, and Incident Peripheral Artery Disease Among Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective Study. Diabetes Care. 2024;47:435–43. 6.Pan D, Guo J, Su Z, Meng W, Wang J, Guo J, et al. Association of prognostic nutritional index with peripheral artery disease in US adults: a cross-sectional study. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2024;24:133. 15.Hicks CW, Wang D, Matsushita K, McEvoy JW, Christenson R, Selvin E. Glycated albumin and HbA1c as markers of lower extremity disease inUS adults with and without diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022;184:109212. 16.Qu C-J, Teng L-Q, Liu X-N, Zhang Y-B, Fang J, Shen C-Y. Dose-Response Relationship Between Physical Activity and the Incidence of Peripheral Artery Disease in General Population: Insights From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:730508. 18.Liu Y, Chang L, Wu M, Xu B, Kang L. Triglyceride Glucose Index Was Associated With the Risk of Peripheral Artery Disease. Angiology. 2022;73:655–9. 19.Loreaux F, Jéhannin P, Le Pabic E, Paillard F, Le Faucheur A, Mahe G. An unfavorable dietary pattern is associated with symptomatic peripheral artery disease. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2024;34:2173–81. 20.Liu Y, Wei R, Tan Z, Chen G, Xu T, Liu Z, et al. Association between dietary fiber intake and peripheral artery disease in hypertensive patients. J Health Popul Nutr. 2024;43:118. 24.Cheng Y, Fang Z, Zhang X, Wen Y, Lu J, He S, et al. Association between triglyceride glucose-body mass index and cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2023;22:75. 25.Kumar M, Deshmukh P, Kumar M, Bhatt A, Sinha AH, Chawla P. Vitamin E Supplementation and Cardiovascular Health: A Comprehensive Review. Cureus [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 Mar 10]; Available from: https://www.cureus.com/articles/184881-vitamin-e-supplementation-and- cardiovascular-health-a-comprehensive-review. Comment 5: In line 228, the text makes reference to "recent studies," yet no corresponding reference is provided. Please provide the references for these recent studies. Respond 5: Thank you for the valuable suggestion. This sentence is redundant, it has been deleted. Comment 6: The observational, cross-sectional study does not define a causal relationship. It is therefore advisable to exercise caution when considering the phrase "These findings should be used when formulating clinical guidelines." Respond 6: Thank you for the valuable suggestion. This sentence is indeed not precise, it has been revised as follows: These findings should be considered when offering dietary guidance to prevent PAD. Comment 7: The extant literature indicates that the isolated consumption of vitamin E does not provide cardiovascular protection. This is evidenced by the fact that studies that used supplementation did not observe the same results as observational studies. It is therefore of interest that this topic is introduced for discussion. Respond 7: Thank you for the detailed review. I have already supplemented as per your request as follows: Extensive clinical research has demonstrated the potential protective effects of vitamin E against long-term cardiovascular diseases[28]. Studies have indicated that taking vitamin E supplements for more than four years can result in a substantial 59% decrease in mortality from coronary disease[29]. The discussion regarding the impact of vitamin E on cardiovascular diseases is complex. While certain studies indicate that vitamin E supplements may provide protection against cardiovascular diseases, others do not support this claim. Additionally, a minority of studies have even suggested potential adverse effects[30,31]. So further investigations are necessary to validate our findings and explore the intricate relationships and potential mechanisms involved. Reviewer #2: Dear Reviewer, Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your comments have greatly helped to improve the quality of our manuscript. Comments: It is a well-written but incomplete article. Language editing is strongly recommended. Professional language support is recommended. In addition to the grammar check, the statistical as well as grammatical reasons why certain methods are favoured should be elaborated. Respond：Thank you for the valuable suggestion. I have made the modifications to the grammatically incorrect parts as per your suggestion. Thank you once again for your guidance. After referring to a large number of previous literatures, the statistical methods used in this study include curve fitting, single factor analysis, multiple factor analysis, stratified analysis, subgroup analysis, etc. 1. Through the interpolation algorithm, curve fitting can generate a smooth curve between the given data points, thereby better understanding the trend and pattern of the data； 2. Single factor analysis not only helps in the initial exploration of the relationship between the predictor and response variables, aiding researchers in understanding the impact of individual variables on the outcome. It also assists researchers in selecting the variables that need to be included in the multiple factor analysis, for instance, by evaluating the changes in partial regression coefficients or OR values. 3. Univariate analysis primarily explores the impact of a single independent variable on the dependent variable through t-tests or analysis of variance (ANOVA). The t-test is suitable for comparing the means of two independent samples or paired samples, while ANOVA is used for comparing the means of three or more groups. These two methods are concise and straightforward, and can intuitively reveal the significant impact of a specific factor when acting independently on the outcome. 4. Multiple factor analysis uses multiple regression analysis to simultaneously examine the combined impact of multiple independent variables on the dependent variable and the interaction effects among the independent variables. This method can more comprehensively reflect the actual situation and reveal the hidden relationships behind complex data. Through multiple regression analysis, we can obtain the regression coefficients of each independent variable, thereby quantifying its specific contribution to the dependent variable, providing strong support for in-depth research. 5. Stratified analysis involves dividing the study subjects into strata based on one or more variables that need to be controlled, which can reduce the impact of confounding factors on the research results and thus provide a more accurate estimation of the association between the exposure factor and the outcome variable. 6. The main purpose of subgroup analysis is to study interactions or effect modification, i.e., whether the effect size varies in different populations or under different conditions. By dividing the study subjects into different subgroups based on certain characteristics (such as gender, disease severity, etc.), estimating the effect sizes for each subgroup separately, and conducting comparisons between subgroups, a better understanding of specific patient, intervention type, or study-specific issues can be achieved. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r003
17 Jan 2025 Decision Letter - Hasan Durmus, Editor PONE-D-24-23667R1Association of dietary vitamin E intake with peripheral arterial disease: A retrospective cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Liu, 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 Mar 03 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, Hasan Durmus Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: 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. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. 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 ****** 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 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 ****** 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. 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: (No Response) Reviewer #2: Dear Author I've checked your corrections. I still have two suggestions. Firstly, please review the journal's reference citation rules. (Reference 4 is not appropriate.) Secondly, in the conclusion section, not only nutrition guidelines can be emphasised but also nutrition education can be emphasised. ****** 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. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: PONE-D-24-23667_R1_reviewer (2).pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r004
Revision 2
4 Feb 2025 Author Response Responds to the reviewer’s comments: Reviewer #1: (No Response) Reviewer #2: Dear Author I've checked your corrections. I still have two suggestions. Firstly, please review the journal's reference citation rules. (Reference 4 is not appropriate.) Secondly, in the conclusion section, not only nutrition guidelines can be emphasised but also nutrition education can be emphasised. Respond：Thank you for the detailed review. Firstly,based on your this comment, we have revised the format of the fourth reference according to the citation rules of the journal. Secondly, the conclusion section has also been revised according to your suggestions. 1.Martin SS, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, Anderson CAM, Arora P, Avery CL, et al. 2024 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2024;149:e347–913. 2.These findings should be considered when offering dietary guidance and nutrition education to prevent PAD. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers_auresp_2.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r005
18 Feb 2025 Decision Letter - Hasan Durmus, Editor Association of dietary vitamin E intake with peripheral arterial disease: A retrospective cross-sectional study PONE-D-24-23667R2 Dear Dr. Liu, 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, Hasan Durmus Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): I would like to inform you that your revised manuscript has undergone a thorough evaluation, and I find the changes to be satisfactory in addressing the key concerns raised during the peer review process. At this stage, the manuscript has been recommended for further consideration by the journal’s editorial team. The final decision will be made following additional editorial checks and approval from the Editor-in-Chief. We appreciate your patience and efforts in improving the quality of the manuscript. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions regarding the process. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. 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 #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. 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 #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 #2: Yes ****** 6. 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 #2: Dear Author, First of all, congratulations on the acceptance of your work. The topic of your work is very topical and makes an important contribution to the literature. ****** 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 #2: No ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r006
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Hasan Durmus, Editor PONE-D-24-23667R2 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Liu, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. 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. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Hasan Durmus Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320356.r007

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .