Predictors of active ageing among older adults in age-friendly communities in Yanji City, China: A cross-sectional study

Jiawei Jiang; Ai Theng Cheong; Shariff Ghazali Sazlina; Zarina Haron; Shanyu Wu; Chenli Liang; Qi Jiang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0336910

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJuly 1, 2025
1 Oct 2025 Decision Letter - Elise Rivera, Editor Dear Dr. Cheong, 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. ============================== ACADEMIC EDITOR: ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 15 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If 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, Elise Rivera 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 remove all personal information, ensure that the data shared are in accordance with participant consent, and re-upload a fully anonymized data set. Note: spreadsheet columns with personal information must be removed and not hidden as all hidden columns will appear in the published file. Additional guidance on preparing raw data for publication can be found in our Data Policy (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-human-research-participant-data-and-other-sensitive-data) and in the following article: http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long . 4. 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. 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: This is a well written manuscript that addresses and under-researched topic. The rigor and quality of this research is high. Just some minor points to address: Methods: did the authors adjust for any covariates in their models? If so, it would be good to make this clearer to the reader. If not, then please explain why this was not the case. In the Limitations section, please mention the limitations of the cross-sectional study design and use of self-report measures. [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 ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** Reviewer #1: This is a timely and rigorously conducted study of active ageing in designated Chinese age-friendly communities in Yanji. While there is recognition that no studies have actually evaluated the influence of implementing age-friendly policies in Yanji, it may have enhanced the significance of overall findings if a parallel assessment was undertaken in communities similar in size to Dan Shan and Yuan Fa but without any overtly implemented age-friendly policies. ****** 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 ******** [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 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336910.r001
Revision 1
13 Oct 2025 Author Response Dear Dr Elise Rivera and Reviewer, Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Predictors of Active Ageing among Older Adults in Age-Friendly Communities in Yanji City, China: A Cross-Sectional Study” (PONE-D-25-35732). We have carefully revised the manuscript in accordance with the editor’s and reviewers' feedback. Below, we provide a point-by-point response. Editor’s Comments 1. Methods: Did the authors adjust for any covariates in their models? Response: Our multiple linear regression analysis was adjusted for key socio-demographic covariates. In our initial submission, the regression results table presented only the variables that were statistically significant in the univariate analyses and were subsequently entered into the final model, for the sake of brevity and clarity. However, we understand that this may have confused. To address this, we have now replaced the results table in the manuscript with the complete model output, which includes all variables that were entered into the multiple linear regression, regardless of their statistical significance. As shown in the updated Table 4 (Page 17, Lines 284), the model was adjusted for covariates, including age, marital status, and living arrangement, in addition to the other significant predictors. This demonstrates that the identified independent predictors (e.g., social connectedness) are essential even after controlling for these potential confounders. Additionally, we have revised the Statistical Analysis section in the Methods to make this adjustment explicit: " To account for potential confounding effects, the model was adjusted for key socio-demographic covariates, including age, educational attainment, marital status, living arrangement, and average family monthly income, to isolate the independent effects of the significant predictors on active ageing."( Page 11, Lines:227-229 ) 2. Limitations: Please mention the limitations of the cross-sectional study design and use of self-report measures. Response: We have revised the Limitations section (Page 22, lines 379–382) to acknowledge that the cross-sectional design precludes causal inference, and that reliance on self-report measures may have introduced recall and social desirability bias. Response to Journal Requirements: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. Response: We have carefully reviewed and reformatted the manuscript to ensure it fully complies with PLOS ONE's style requirements. 2. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’s questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Response: We have completed the PLOS Questionnaire on Inclusivity in Global Research and will upload it as a Supporting Information file named "S3 Inclusivity in global research questionnaire." 3. Please remove all personal information, ensure that the data shared are in accordance with participant consent, and re-upload a fully anonymized data set. Response: We have carefully reviewed our dataset in accordance with the PLOS ONE Data Policy and the guidance outlined in BMJ (2010) “Preparing raw clinical data for publication: guidance for journal editors, authors, and peer reviewers” (BMJ 2010;340:c181), which is referenced on the official PLOS ONE website. The dataset did not contain personally identifying information. To further minimize the risk of indirect identification, the continuous variable “age” has been recoded into age groups consistent with the categories used in the manuscript. All other demographic variables (sex, education level, marital status, living arrangement, and average monthly family income) were retained as categorical variables to replicate the analyses. The dataset is now anonymized and compliant with participant consent and ethical requirements. A revised version has been re-uploaded as S1_The database anonymized.xlsx. 4. 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. Response: We have carefully reviewed the reviewer comments and confirm that no specific previously published works were recommended for citation. Therefore, no additional references were required or added in the revised manuscript. 5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. Response: We have carefully reviewed our reference list and confirmed that it is complete and correct. All cited works are relevant, and none have been retracted. Reviewer’s Comment This is a timely and rigorously conducted study of active ageing in designated Chinese age-friendly communities in Yanji. While there is recognition that no studies have actually evaluated the influence of implementing age-friendly policies in Yanji, it may have enhanced the significance of overall findings if a parallel assessment was undertaken in communities similar in size to Dan Shan and Yuan Fa but without any overtly implemented age-friendly policies. Response: We greatly appreciate this insightful suggestion. While this comparative design was beyond the scope of the current study, we acknowledge this limitation and have added a statement in the 'Strengths and limitations of the study' section (page 22, lines 384–387). Future studies may consider such comparative approaches to strengthen the evidence. These revisions have strengthened our manuscript. We sincerely thank you for your thoughtful review and constructive feedback. Kind regards, Cheong AiTheng On behalf of all co-authors Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336910.r002
3 Nov 2025 Decision Letter - Elise Rivera, Editor Predictors of Active Ageing among Older Adults in Age-Friendly Communities in Yanji City, China: A Cross-Sectional Study PONE-D-25-35732R1 Dear Dr. Cheong, 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, Elise Rivera Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336910.r003
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Elise Rivera, Editor PONE-D-25-35732R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Cheong, 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. You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing. 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. Elise Rivera Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336910.r004

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 .