Dear Dr. Yosef,

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.

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 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,

Tsegaye Alemayehu, Msc

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 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.   

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that [The present study data can be obtained from the author when requested reasonably. Hiwot Lidet: email: halleljezu@gmail.com].

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. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.     

5. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 3, 4, and 5 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

6. 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?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: Dear author,

1- References 9, 21, 37, and 40 are old, please use new references.

2- Please insert the suitable footnotes for Figures2, 3 and 5.

3- Please insert the suitable footnotes for Tables 3, 4 and 5.

4- Do you have information about false positives or false negatives of samples?

Kind regards

Reviewer #2: Manuscript Number: PONE-D-25-12506

Title: Multidrug-resistant bacterial profiles of inanimate objects at Zewditu

Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Overview and general recommendation:

This subject is very important because in developing countries, there is a lack of

information on the extent and types of contamination, as well as the

microbiological profiles of commonly used medical instruments and inanimate

surfaces in hospitals. Therefore, ongoing research in this area is necessary to

address and mitigate the problem.

I found the manuscript well written, well described and the references were new. I

listed minor points below for editing.

Comments to Authors:

Minor points

1- In this manuscript: you wrote (12 times Our)!!! The rule of manuscript

writing is to avoid using (Our). So you should delete (Our), use the formal

scientific words (This review or The current review or The present

review).

2- In 364 line; you wrote (We)!!! The rule of manuscript writing is to avoid

using (We). So you should delete (We), use the formal scientific words

(This review or The current review or The present review).

3- In discussion: 366line; I very recommend you to add new references here

related with [Hospital-acquired infections and carbapenemase-producing

isolates with gene transfer or mutations] to be stronger scientifically. Kindly

add the two mentioned new references

Hasan SA, Raoof WM, Ahmed KK. Antibacterial activity of deer musk and

Ziziphus spina-christi against carbapebem resis-tant gram negative bacteria

isolated from patients with burns and wounds. Regulatory Mechanisms in

Biosystems. 2024 Apr 17;15(2):267-78.

[DOI: https://doi.org/10.15421/022439]

Hasan SA, Raoof WM, Ahmed KK. FIRST REPORT OF CO-

HARBORING BLEOMYCIN RESISTANCE GENE (bleMBL) AND

CARBAPENEMASE RESISTANCE GENE (blaNDM-1) KLEBSIELLA

PNEUMONIAE IN IRAQ WITH COMPARISON STUDY AMONG THE

SENSITIVITY TEST, THE BD PHOENIX CPO DETECT TEST, AND

THE RAPIDEC® CARBA NP TEST. Siberian Journal of Life Sciences and

Agriculture. 2024 Aug 31;16(4):208-37. [https://doi.org/10.12731/2658-6649-2024-16-4-1249]

Kind regards

Reviewer #3: This study presents Multidrug-resistant bacterial profiles of inanimate objects at Zewditu Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. This finding is relevant for clinical and diagnostic applications.

Comments

Line: 72- 73 Common ESBL- and carbapenemase-producing bacteria in nosocomial infections include Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and Enterobacter cloacae. Reference is required

Line: 83-84 Hospital design and hygiene practices should primarily focus on managing nosocomial pathogens and resistant strains, which can contaminate surfaces, hands, equipment, and air. This sentence is not required here, please remove it. It is better to use it in the discussion part.

Line: 109: ……………ISO/DIS 14698-1 guidelines. Please cite the guideline

Line 120-123. ---------------------CLSI 34th edition (2024). Please cite the CLSI standard

Line: 133----------------------------CLSI guidelines. Please don’t forget to cite while using the guidelines and Literature

Line 170-171: ………. Please remove this sentence and take it with the figure

Table 3: Abbreviations of Antibiotics should be indicated in full form as a footnote in Table 3

Table 3: Are you sure that AMP susceptibility tests are recommended for K. pneumoniae? I don’t think so. Please be sure and correct the typo.

Table 4: What does Ptn stand for in the table? Please write in full form or note in the footnote, please.

Table 4: Please be sure all abbreviations are listed as full forms before being abbreviated, or indicate their full form in the footnote

Lines 24-241: should be removed from here and go with the figure

Line 250-251: Please remember that the topic of figures always goes with the figure. Don’t put it alone in the manuscript. Please take it to the figure.

Line 266-267: Remove the topic and put it in Figure 4

Line 273-274 The topic of the figure is not required here

Line 276: You said that “Several studies ……………..but you only used one reference (14). The term several indicates more than one reference. Could you add more references or modify the sentence, please?

Line 282-283: The rise in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) also contributes to an increased morbidity and mortality rates for HCAIs. This sentence does not make sense. Please rewrite or remove it.

**********

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

Reviewer #3: 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

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-25-12506 reviewer report.pdf

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comments 2025.docx

Dear Dr. Hiwot Lidet Yosef,

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 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,

Tsegaye Alemayehu, Msc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. 

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

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

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: Dear author,

This is a good article and could provide useful information for readers of this article. Please make the following corrections. References 24 and 44 are old, please use new references.

Kind regards

Reviewer #2: Greetings

Very good work.

You did all the scientific requirements by the correct way.

Now, your manuscript is more accurate.

Kind regards.

**********

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

Multidrug-resistant bacterial profiles of inanimate objects at Zewditu Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

PONE-D-25-12506R2

Dear Dr. Yosef,

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. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support .

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,

Tsegaye Alemayehu, Msc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewer #1:

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

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

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: Dear Author,

This article titled "Multidrug-resistant bacterial profiles of inanimate objects at Zewditu Memorial Hospital,

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia." is a good article and provides good information to the readers of this article.

Kind regards

**********

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

**********