Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 25, 2024
Decision Letter - Engelbert Adamwaba Nonterah, Editor

PONE-D-24-48920Parental Involvement in School-Based Mental Health interventions for Young People in low resource settings: A Qualitative study from Zimbabwe and GhanaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mushonga,

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  Apr 25 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,

Engelbert A. Nonterah, MD, PhD

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. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

4. In the online submission form you indicate that your data is not available for proprietary reasons and have provided a contact point for accessing this data. Please note that your current contact point is a co-author on this manuscript. According to our Data Policy, the contact point must not be an author on the manuscript and must be an institutional contact, ideally not an individual. Please revise your data statement to a non-author institutional point of contact, such as a data access or ethics committee, and send this to us via return email. Please also include contact information for the third party organization, and please include the full citation of where the data can be found.

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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

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: 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: Parental Involvement in School-Based Mental Health interventions for Young People in

low resource settings: A Qualitative study from Zimbabwe and Ghana

This qualitative study explored the mechanisms for effectively involving parents in SBMH interventions for young people in Zimbabwe and Ghana (low resource setting).

Overall

• The manuscript is well written, very clear and adds knowledge on parental involvement in school-based mental health interventions for young people in a resource limited setting. The title is appropriate and the aim is clearly stated. The research is important to the field. The structure and language are appropriate.

Abstract

• It is very clear and it highlights the key findings of the study.

Introduction

• The introduction is sufficient, clear and well organized.

• The subject matter is well introduced and laid a solid foundation for the manuscript.

• I think it could be helpful to add a sentence highlighting the fact that parental involvement is currently not part of the school based mental health interventions in Zimbabwe and Ghana.

Methodology

• The methods are reproducible and well described.

• Correct terms were used to describe the study population

• Clear inclusion and exclusion criteria.

• It would be helpful to explain why the different age groups for the two countries (5-24 in Zimbabwe and 15-18 in Ghana).

• Please shed some light on why CMDs are common among young people in Navrongo, Ghana.

• For table 1 consider using sex instead of gender, gender is a social construct that refers to the behaviors and role and identities of people.

• For table 1 is there a difference between the zeros and the dashes?

Results and discussion

• The results are well presented.

• There is general flow and logic on justification of interpretation of results and the conclusion.

• Clear strengths and limitations.

Conclusion

• Precise and to the point.

References, tables and figures

• The references are numbered correctly and citations are appropriate.

• For the references please check for inconsistencies i.e. some journal names are written in full and others are shortened. References number 5 and 10 (W.H.O and World Health Organization) etc.

• The table is well labeled.

• There is presentation consistency.

Reviewer #2: This is a very well-written and organized manuscript that addresses a gap in the literature regarding an important issue of adolescent mental health. The methodology is sound and described in depth. There are only a few minor suggestions that I would make to the authors:

- In Methods (Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria), authors mention "active major mental disorder" as an exclusion criterion. Please provide additional details on how that was defined - whether by RA designation, previous diagnosis, use of pharmacotherapy, etc.

- In Methods, consider providing additional details that can help contextualize the socioeconomic status of the schools/student participants. For example, if public vs private school. This can be useful since the Discussion mentions logistical barriers to parental involvement.

- In Results/Discussion, consider adding some comparison of responses between the two study sites in Zimbabwe and Ghana. While the responses from both sites seem to reinforce each other, it would be interesting to mention if there were any differences noted between the sites.

- In Results, the level of subheadings and their formatting needs to be fixed.

**********

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:  Masih A Babagoli

**********

[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.

Revision 1

Response to Reviewers

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'.

Editor Comments

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.

Response: The manuscript has now been formatted as per PLOS ONE’s style requirements

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.”

Response: A complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research has been included as supporting information

3. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

Response: All additional details requested regarding consent/assent has been provided in the Methods section

4. In the online submission form you indicate that your data is not available for proprietary reasons and have provided a contact point for accessing this data. Please note that your current contact point is a co-author on this manuscript. According to our Data Policy, the contact point must not be an author on the manuscript and must be an institutional contact, ideally not an individual. Please revise your data statement to a non-author institutional point of contact, such as a data access or ethics committee, and send this to us via return email. Please also include contact information for the third party organization, and please include the full citation of where the data can be found.

Response: The data underlying the results presented in this study are available from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, United Kingdom (16 De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF). The point of contact for the data is Melanie Abas, the Principal Investigator of the project at KCL. As per our ethical approvals, access to the data is restricted to the study team, who are co-authors of this paper. Since participant consent was not obtained for data sharing beyond the study team, we are unable to deposit the data in a public repository or share it with external individuals.

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.

Response: Reference list has been reviewed

Reviewer 1 Comments

I think it could be helpful to add a sentence highlighting the fact that parental involvement is currently not part of the school based mental health interventions in Zimbabwe and Ghana.

Response: The statement requested was added in the introduction section of the manuscript

It would be helpful to explain why the different age groups for the two countries (15-24 in Zimbabwe and 15-18 in Ghana).

Response: Additional information on why the different age groups for the two countries (15-24 in Zimbabwe and 15-18 in Ghana) was provided.

Please shed some light on why CMDs are common among young people in Navrongo, Ghana.

Response: The requested information was provided

For table 1 consider using sex instead of gender, gender is a social construct that refers to the behaviors and role and identities of people.

Response: This was resolved

For table 1 is there a difference between the zeros and the dashes?

Response: This was resolved

For the references please check for inconsistencies i.e. some journal names are written in full and others are shortened. References number 5 and 10 (W.H.O and World Health Organization) etc.

Response: This was resolved

Reviewer 2 Comments

In Methods (Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria), authors mention "active major mental disorder" as an exclusion criterion. Please provide additional details on how that was defined - whether by RA designation, previous diagnosis, use of pharmacotherapy, etc.

Response: Additional details requested were provided

In Methods, consider providing additional details that can help contextualize the socioeconomic status of the schools/student participants. For example, if public vs private school. This can be useful since the Discussion mentions logistical barriers to parental involvement.

Response: Additional details with regards to socio-economic status of the schools and participants were provided.

In Results/Discussion, consider adding some comparison of responses between the two study sites in Zimbabwe and Ghana. While the responses from both research sites seem to reinforce each other, it would be interesting to mention if there were any differences noted between the sites.

Response: Slight comparisons were provided in the results section (PTA meetings) and discussion section as largely the results from both sites reinforce each other.

In Results, the level of subheadings and their formatting needs to be fixed.

Response: Resolved

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Engelbert Adamwaba Nonterah, Editor

Parental Involvement in School-Based Mental Health interventions for Young People in low resource settings: A Qualitative study from Zimbabwe and Ghana

PONE-D-24-48920R1

Dear Dr. Rufaro Hamish Mushonga,

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,

Engelbert A. Nonterah, MD, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Engelbert Adamwaba Nonterah, Editor

PONE-D-24-48920R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mushonga,

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

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days 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. Engelbert Adamwaba Nonterah

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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 .