Peer Review History
Original SubmissionApril 10, 2020 |
---|
PONE-D-20-10365 Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women in seven South and Southeast Asian Countries: evidence from nationally representatives survey PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Sunuwar, 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 reviewers have pointed out many important aspects for revision of the manuscript. A major improvement is necessary for further evaluation of the revised manuscript. Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 13 2020 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:
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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Marly A. Cardoso, Ph.D. 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 2. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide. 3. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright. We require you to either (a) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (b) remove the figures from your submission: a) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) [#] to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text: “I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.” Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission. In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].” b) If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only. The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful: USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/ Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/ USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/# Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/ 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. [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: 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 study aimed to assess the prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age (WRA) in seven selected South and Southeast Asian countries. This study was a secondary analysis of the seven selected South and Southeast Asian countries. During the 2012 World Health Assembly, the World Health Organization endorsed a target of a 50% reduction of anemia among women of reproductive age by 2025. Therefore, the study deals with a well-updated subject. Very few studies have utilized nationally representative data to investigate the prevalence and determinants of anemia among reproductive-aged women in the South and Southeast Asian context. With this, it adds important data. Here are suggestions for the article. Title Suggestion: "Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian Countries: evidence from nationally representatives survey". The insertion of the term "women of reproductive age" better specifies the study population. And, it would not lead to exceed the number of characters allowed. Abstract In lines 24, 28 and 31 of the Abstract section there is an abbreviation, which is not prohibited, but should be avoided in this part of the text, according to the rules of the journal. The inclusion of the term "women of reproductive age" in its entirety would not exceed the number of characters in the section (300). Or, this can be a term added in the title, also without exceeding the character limit of the title which would better define the population studied. The keywords "associated factors" and "South Southeast Asia" were not found in the MESH descriptors. The text is brief, presents the objective of the study, includes substantial results, focuses on positive and non-negative findings. Introduction The authors start from the macro idea, contextualize, and even identify the problem. The section is finished with the justification and the main objective of the work. Methodology Experiments, statistics, and other analyses were performed to a high technical standard and were described in sufficient detail. Line 141 – change the unit gm/dl by g/dL for both hemoglobin <12g/dL and 11g/dL. Line 142 – change Homocue for Hemocue. In lines 146, 147 and 148, the authors say that the predictor variables were chosen according to the literature review. However, in the introduction they say that several approaches at the population level have been taken over the years, such as micronutrient supplementation among adolescent girls and women, food fortification, nutritional education, counseling and orientation of an iron-rich dietary plan for at-risk populations. However, these are not variables evaluated in the study. In lines 154 and 155 the authors need to explain better that the "wealth index" is a measure calculated by DHS itself and that it is based on the possession of consumer goods. It was not clear how it was obtained and, above all, how the categories were categorized. The understanding that it is a variable calculated by DHS is only possible if the reader searches the DHS Program website further. Line 159 defines abbreviations upon first appearance in the text of ANC. The variable iron intake is mentioned in lines 158 and 162, but do not explain what type of iron intake was this: supplementation acquired by women, given by some public policy, homemade fortification, dietetics? In the discussion (line 337), the limitation of not having evaluated food consumption data is mentioned. This variable is external intake? It is not clear. The research meets all applicable standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity. Results Table 2 -age group years - specify where women aged 35 entered. If it is in the third category express as ≥35 years. Discussion In line 297, a study that demonstrates the prevalence of anemia in an age group quite different from that of the study (children). In lines 314 to 319, the authors return to the results of anemia prevalence in rural and urban areas, present a convergent reference to the finding, but do not discuss the possible causes of this. In line 337, when they mention the absence of food intake data, they speak only of the intake of "mothers and children". They do not talk about the intake of non-pregnant women and the children's food intake would not reflect the mothers' food intake, because the eating pattern of such opposite age groups is different. Conclusion The conclusion section responds to the proposed objectives and closes the subject by resuming the justification of the study and makes a brief prospective observation of what should be done from the findings. References Almost all references are from the last 10 years. Review formatting of article references by placing them in Vancouver style. Examples of changes that need to be made include: - The issues of journals should come in parentheses - examples - References 12, 15, 18, 19, 20. - You do not put pp. before referring to the pages of journals. - Reference 20 - quote in the supplement standards. - References 14 and 25 do not contain the names of journals. - On the pages of the references use only the unit or dozen on the final pages mentioned. The article can be published after the mentioned corrections. Reviewer #2: PARECER PONE-D-20-10365 Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women in seven South and Southeast Asian Countries: evidence from nationally representatives survey The study aimed to assess the prevalence and factors associated with anemia in women of reproductive age in seven selected countries in South and Southeast Asia. Based on the most recent data obtained from the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) of these seven countries, they analyzed data from 726,164 women. Multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to assess the factors associated with anemia among women in each country separately. Therefore, it is of relevance to public health study, which used nationally representative sample and appropriate statistical analysis. With minor adjustments it will be in conditions of publication. The introduction presents prolix writing and with redundant information or that should be in another section. For example, right in the second line of the introduction it defines the cutoff points for anemia, which is suitable for is in methods (as it is also). There is an exaggerated exploration of the factors associated with anemia, as well as prevalence values in different situations. Much of this information would be better used in the discussion, situating the results found. Line 159 – “…ever terminated pregnancy, ANC during pregnancy”: ANC must be defined a priori. Line 160-161 – delete the second BMI: BMI was categorized into underweight BMI... Line 167 – “…analyzed using STATA/MP version 14.1” / Stata/MP, version 14.1 Line 190 – It refers to figure 1, but the figure shown is named as figure 2. By the way, the title of this figure should be more intelligible (self-sufficient), so that the reader can understand what it is about without having to resort to the text. Line 219 – “...women who didn't consume iron in all countries.” Use more precise wording: although insufficient, some amount they consumed. Line 227 – In the table title, write WRA in full. Lines 247-248 – “The association of anemia among 15-49 years old women with environmental and individual factors was examined using the binary logistic regression model.” This has already been reported in methods. Line 249 - Women's having... / women's having... Lines 265-266 – “age groups 15-24 years was positively associated with an increased likelihood of anemia compared to age groups of 25-34…” the term positively seems misused. If the variables are categorical (and not ordinal or continuous) and the highest prevalence was in the youngest age group, how was the relationship positive? He's confused. Confirm the adequacy of this term in other parts of the article. Line 296-301 – “The cross-sectional study from the DHS done in 27 Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) between 2008 and 2014 found that the prevalence of anemia among children was 59.9% [33], which is slightly higher than our findings.” It makes no sense to compare data from children with those from women. If you want to use the information, make some bridge to make sense. Line 333 – “This study comprises of some limitations. First, due to the cross-sectional nature of data, this study…” Delete the last this study. Line 335 – “Second, Comparable data. / Second, comparable data… Line 337 – “Third, dietary intake of mothers and children were not assessed…” the study does not address children. ********** 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: HAROLDO DA SILVA FERREIRA [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 |
PONE-D-20-10365R1 Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian countries: evidence from nationally representative surveys PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Sunuwar, 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 address all minor suggestions pointed out by the two reviewers. Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 08 2020 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:
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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Marly A. Cardoso, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE [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: (No Response) ********** 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: No ********** 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: I believe that almost all comments were answered properly, which made the article clearer. Therefore, it can be published. I suggest that in reference number 14 the name of the journal BMC Women’s Health be included, as this suggestion has not been heeded. However, after this correction, there is no need to return the article to the reviewers for further evaluation. Reviewer #2: PLOS ONE Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian countries: evidence from nationally representative surveys PONE-D-20-10365R1 The authors responded to most of the suggestions presented in the previous version. However, there are still minor changes to be made before the manuscript is published. Next, I specify what these changes would be. Line 33: The combined prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age in the seven selected South and Southeast Asian countries was… Change to: The combined prevalence of anemia was… Line 28-30: (Bangladesh DHS 2011, Cambodia DHS 2014, India NFHS 2016, Maldives DHS 2016, Myanmar DHS 2015, Nepal DHS 2016, Timor-Leste 2015)... Change to: (Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal and Timor-Leste)... Line 66: …conducted by Balarajan Y., et al (2011) reported that […] urban or rural settings [6]. Change to: …conducted by Balarajan et al. [6] reported that [...] urban or rural settings. Line 113: Therefore, this study aims to identify […]: Start in a new paragraph. Line 143: […] anemia was defined […]: Put a comma between g/dL and respectively: (g/dL, respectively) Line 144: Hemoglobin level was assessed using capillary blood and the HemoCue rapid testing technique […] Wouldn't that be better? Hemoglobin level in capillary blood was assessed using the HemoCue rapid testing technique […] Line 173: […] than one year. ANC visits during […]. In Portuguese, does not start sentence with abbreviations or numbers. I am not sure if there is this rule in English (I am not an English speaker). Line 206: Fig 1. Prevalence of anemia […]: Place after the next paragraph, in which fig. 1 is referred to for the first time. Line 329: […]. Yang F et al. (2018) also reported […] middle-income countries [38]. Change to: […]. Yang et al. [38] also reported […] middle-income countries. Other similar cases exist throughout the text and should be corrected. ********** 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: Yes: HAROLDO DA SILVA FERREIRA [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 2 |
PONE-D-20-10365R2 Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian countries: evidence from nationally representative surveys PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Sunuwar, 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 authors have made all changes requested by the reviewers. However, I have noted the use of the word "multivariable" instead of "multiple" regression models. Thus, please replace "multivariable" by "multiple" in the text and Tables when referring to multiple regression analyses. Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 15 2020 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:
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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Marly A. Cardoso, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] [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 3 |
Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian countries: evidence from nationally representative surveys PONE-D-20-10365R3 Dear Dr. Sunuwar, 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 for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, 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, Marly A. Cardoso, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: |
Formally Accepted |
PONE-D-20-10365R3 Prevalence and factors associated with anemia among women of reproductive age in seven South and Southeast Asian countries: evidence from nationally representative surveys Dear Dr. Sunuwar: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. 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 plosone@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. Marly A. Cardoso 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 .