We’re here to support researchers. Visit our COVID-19 page for links to emerging research, updates about our policies, and more resources related to the pandemic. View the page
PRIVACY POLICY
We have updated our Privacy Policy. Read more
When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.
Making the review process transparent gives the scientific community a chance to learn more about how other experts are reviewing manuscripts. Read robust examples of peer review, organized by manuscript section.
FROM THE PEER REVIEWS:
The model used for the study should be further described, a model sketch would be useful. It’s very hard for the reader to understand what was done in the absence of a clear description or details on calculations of the model. Supplementary Table 1 provides only model variables and their description, the model input and output data (and data sources when relevant) should be made available.
AUTHOR RESPONSE: The reviewer has made a valid point. An open-access publication by Rattanavipapong et al (2020) provides a detailed description of the model in a supplementary file. The paper is open-access and therefore this description is publically available. We have referenced this paper in the text between lines 179-180 (page 7) stating that “a full description of the model and how the model outcomes were generated is available elsewhere.”
‘It takes two to tango’: Bridging the gap between country need and vaccine product innovation
FROM THE PEER REVIEWS:
More information needed on how children were identified for the study. For example, “during well visits” doesn’t describe how they were identified as potential participants, or give info as to rates of declined participation etc. Also, what constituted major life events? What did “persistent parenting concerns” consist of and how were those identified? Who collected the data; how were digital questionnaires offered?
One year after introducing published peer review, over 3,300 authors of PLOS articles have chosen to publish their peer review history.
Learn more about the benefits and different types of transparent peer review.