Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMarch 27, 2025
Decision Letter - Aamir Ijaz, Editor

PONE-D-25-15997Emergency dispatchers as instructors of laypersons in unplanned out-of-hospital deliveries - interdisciplinary qualitative studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hänninen,

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. The article needs some clarification / modifications in the manuscript as pointed out by two reviewers. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 29 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,

Aamir Ijaz, MD, FCPS, FRCP, MCPS-HPE

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:

 [Publication and Production Services of the South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences covers the Article Processing Charge].

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

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

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that [Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available because they contain participant-identifying information, and are sensitive.].

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

4. 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 .

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.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[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: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: 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: Thanks for inviting me to review this interesting, but thought-provoking article. Although the outcome appears relatively subjective, this article is very unique and offers a different perspective on the issue of out-of-hospital delivery by laypeople in a developed clime. Apart from the fact that the title is not concise and catchy, the article is not only well-written, but will make an interesting read. I would recommend this article for publication.

Reviewer #2: The article is nicely written in context of how system works in Finland and will be useful for other countries using similar systems. However few minor statements need clarification.

1. In result section ,on line number 292 it is written that four out of five though total number of respondents were 31. This needs clarification

2.Line 323 placing the severely bleeding mother in recovery position is not clear and needs a bit of more explanation

**********

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

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

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

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Ekwuazi Kingsley Emeka

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.

Revision 1

Dear Academic Editor of PLOS One,

Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript “Emergency dispatchers as instructors of laypersons in unplanned out-of-hospital deliveries - interdisciplinary qualitative study”. We have carefully clarified the points raised by the Reviewers. We have marked the changes in the manuscript with yellow highlighting.

Regarding the funding of this research, the authors received no specific funding or salary for this work. Development Services unit of South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences will pay the Article Processing Charge. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Regarding the public availability of the data, this study received a favorable opinion (Statement 127/2023, attachment) from the Ethics Committee of the Tampere Region during the advance evaluation on September 5, 2023. The ethical approval for this research did not include the public publication of the data. Therefore, making the data publicly available would breach compliance with the protocol approved by the research ethics board (PLOS ONE Data Availability Policy). It is not possible to make the data publicly available for ethical reasons, as it contains sensitive, health-related information that could compromise the participants’ privacy (ALLEA 2023; GDPR; TENK 2019). Health-related information (e.g., childbirth) constitutes special categories of personal data and must be handled with particular care, as it requires specific protection (GDPR). Other researchers can find more information about the Ethics Committee of the Tampere Region here: https://www.tuni.fi/en/research/responsible-science-and-research/research-integrity/ethics-committee-of-the-tampere-region and they can request access to the research data (available up-on request) via email:

Secretary: Senior specialist Heikki Eilo heikki.eilo@tuni.fi or researchdata@tuni.fi

Research authorization

The Emergency Response Centre Administration granted the research permit regarding the method of empathy-based stories (MEBS) on December 8, 2023 (HAK-2316452, attachment). The issued research permit did not include permission for the public publication of the research data. Although the MEBS data has been pseudonymized, a risk still exists of identifying individual participants or of sensitive, confidential health-related information being accessed by unauthorized parties.

The informed consent (ALLEA 2023; TENK 2019) provided by the emergency dispatchers for participation in this study did not include permission for the public publication of the research data, because they also refer to third parties (lay assistants and birthing persons). Health-related information (e.g., childbirth) constitutes a special category of personal data and must be handled with particular care, as it requires specific protection (GDPR). Other researchers can request access to the data from the Emergency Response Centre Agency https://112.fi/en/frontpage via email to:

Head of Project Management Office: Mrs. Ullamaija Nenonen ullamaija.nenonen@112.fi or pro-jektitoimisto@112.fi

The informed consent (ALLEA 2023; TENK 2019) provided by the lay assistants for participation in this study did not include permission for the public publication of the research data. Although the thematic interview data have been pseudonymized, there remains a risk of identifying individual participants or of sensitive, confidential health-related information being accessed by unauthorized parties. When obtaining informed consent from the lay assistants, permission for public data sharing was not requested, as this would not comply with the European GDPR, to which we must adhere. Opening the data retrospectively without informing the participants would not align with the good scientific practice as defined by the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK).

First authorship agreement

As the corresponding author and custodian of the data, I am committed to doing everything possible to ensure that other researchers are granted access to both MEBS and thematic interview data (available upon request) when necessary.

According to the research ethics and data policy of Tampere University, the research data can only be held by the researcher if they are not employed by the university. Since I am not in an employment relationship with Tampere University, I am the data controller for the research, not the university.

Personally, as a researcher, I support the PLOS ONE Data Availability Policy and the mission of Open Science. However, I am bound by ethical guidelines (ALLEA 2023; TENK 2019) and legislation (GDPR). The principle ‘as open as possible, as closed as necessary’ applies in this context (PLOS ONE Data Availability policy).

email: jussi.hanninen@xamk.fi

References

European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities ALLEA (2023). https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/

Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK (2019). The Ethical Principles of Research with Human Participants and Ethical Review in the Human Sciences in Finland. Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK Guidelines 2019. https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2021-01/Ethical_review_in_human_sciences_2020.pdf

General Data Protection Regulation GDPR 9§. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FI/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2016.119.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2016:119:TOC

PLOS ONE Data Availability Policy. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability

We hope that our response adequately addresses all the points raised, and we look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Mr. Jussi Hänninen, Prof. Hanna Toiviainen, Dr. Hilla Nordquist

Reviewer One:

We truly appreciate the time you took to review our article and your encouraging feedback. Thank you.

Reviewer Two:

Thank you for taking the time to read our article and for your positive feedback.

On line 292, we have clarified that this is approximately 80% rather than 4 out of 5 participants. We hope this phrasing is clearer for the reader.

On line 323, we agree the phrasing about the “severely bleeding mother” was somewhat clumsy and have rewritten it as follows: “Relevant instructions related to handling the delivery included, for example, uncovering the lower body and observing the presenting part in the birth canal, instructing the person giving birth to push during a contraction, and if the mother experiences severe bleeding, she is placed into the recovery position.”

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response letter_rv2.docx
Decision Letter - Aamir Ijaz, Editor

Emergency dispatchers as instructors of laypersons in unplanned out-of-hospital deliveries - interdisciplinary qualitative study

PONE-D-25-15997R1

Dear Dr. Hänninen,

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,

Aamir Ijaz, MD, FCPS, FRCP, MCPS-HPE

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Aamir Ijaz, Editor

PONE-D-25-15997R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hänninen,

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

Professor Aamir Ijaz

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 .