Implementing psychological first aid ontology.

BACKGROUND: This study develops an ontology of Psychological First Aid (PFA) by extracting relevant knowledge from a review of PFA literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted using the PFA ontology development 101 method. This review processes previously-developed PFA studies by consulting Google Scholar, CINHL, PUBMED, and MEDLINE. Protege 5.0 program was used to integrate with ontology development. The developed PFA ontology consisted of eight super classes: Action agenda, Assessment, Concrete method, Disaster type, Disaster disposition, Purpose, Qualification and Skill, Reaction. In total, 166 terms were collected.
RESULTS: The eight super classes were divided into 72 classes and 64 subclasses. The composition yielded in a total of 166 axioms (85 logical axioms; 81 declaration axioms).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides basic data to guide development and composition of PFA arbitration programs.

Introduction

Victims of natural disasters are likely to suffer from psychological shock, pain and extreme stress reactions. If these psychological traumas are not resolved, they may lead to depression, anxiety, and even post-traumatic stress disorder [1]. Psychological First Aid (PFA) is an act of providing immediate psychological support by mental health counselors or mental health professionals to people who need psychological help after a disaster. PFA is distinct from medical procedures such as artificial respiration at the scene of an accident [2]. PFA aims to improve the physical and psychological short-term function by helping victims to regain psychological stability after a disaster, and focuses on reinforcing the assistance of disaster victims by connecting support systems for continuous help [3]. Therefore, education in PFA should be expanded, manuals and an integrated system established. This process requires understanding and connection of information structure between human and software by implementing an ontology for PFA. An ontology is a representation of the relations among a set of concepts and categories. It can be used to clarify concepts by defining terms in a consistent form that can be used to guide processing of information [4].

Recently, ontology research in the field of health and medical care is mainly used to define and connect diagnosis and medical terms. However, it has been not easy to systematize one information on psychological first aid in emergency rescue, psychology, health science, nursing, and medicine, and to provide PFA to actual subjects through customized services based on a consistent method. Furthermore, methods to provide PFA to actual subjects by using customized services and a consistent method have not been developed. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clarify standards and protocols that can provide PFA to victims in the event of a disaster by implementing PFA ontology.

The purpose of this study is to implement an ontology as an analysis framework for collecting and classifying documents related to PFA, and to us the ontology to develop practical guidelines for PFA.

Materials and methods

In this work, we use Class, Object, Property, and Data property to collect and classify PFA terms used in the domain, and to associate meaningfully defined classes. The PFA ontology of this study was implemented according to the Ontology Development 101 [5] procedure, which was described to help beginners to understand the development process of health and medical ontology. The process of implementing PFA ontology by using the Ontology Development 101 method is as follows [5].

First, we identified the area to be included in the ontology and the application range. The purpose of this study was to determine (1) the population to which the ontology will be applied, (2) the purpose of the ontology development, and (3) the area in which the PFA will be expressed in this study. One of the ways to answer questions that identify these areas and ranges is to write a competency question [6]. Then resources that can be used in each literature are collected to implement the desired PFA ontology. The terms that will constitute the ontology are collected. This process can clarify the concept in the process of implementing ontology and identify the definition of attributes necessary to establish the relationship between concepts. Then we defined hierarchical relationships among classes.

In this step, terms with the same meaning and concept are classified considering the attributes and nature of terms, then the hierarchical relationship between them is implemented.

In this study, after defining classes, specific concepts were arranged using a top-down technique to establish a classification system between classes, while at the same time establishing comprehensive concepts. Then we defined class attributes. In this step, after defining he hierarchical relationship between classes are defined, we define the attribute of each class, and all lower classes inherit the attributes of the upper classes, and pass them to the still-lower classes. Then we defined facets of attributes. Types of attributes to be included were String, Number, Boolean, Enumerated, and Instance.

A string is a list of letters, such as a name; a Number is a numeral, Boolean is a yes/no format; Enumerated is a specific value of a set (e.g., the degree of symptoms is indicated as ‘mild’, ‘moderate’, or ‘severe’); Instance an attribute value of a specific class, which means that it becomes an instance of a specific class [7].

Results

The first step in building an ontology is to determine its domain and scope; i.e., the purpose of using the ontology, the target demographic, and the management group. These questions are useful for testing later ontologies. The following questions are presented in the PFA ontology. Then we searched for existing searchable and reusable ontologies. We utilize Google Scholar, CINHL, PUBMED, and MEDLINE to search previously-developed PFA. The main existing ontologies were used for disaster management and emergency response systems. We used bioportal, OSL, and ontobe to utilize the databases. Then we collected and enumerated the terms. The search method applied to the database in the literature was "Psychological" AND "First Aid" AND "Ontology". In order to extract the latest literature, we have limited it to papers published over the last 10 years from January 1, 2012 to January 31, 2021. The results of the study were selected for the final seven papers except for non-original article (n = 44), non-relevant outcome (n = 8), non-relevant study (n = 3), non-English paper (n = 1), and multiple publication (n = 1). Researchers applied the search formula to search and review the text of the literature one by one through several meetings and telephone exchanges. This repeated process eliminated literature that did not conform to the research topic. The researchers conducted cross-analysis once again through a meeting to confirm the final seven papers selected, and if there is no consensus between researchers, the final 100% agreement was reached until the agreement was reached through the final agreement (Fig 1).

Fig 1

Flow chart of the sample selection process.

By scanning the existing literature and papers related to PFA, we focused on establishing a comprehensive list regardless of the overlap between concepts, the attributes of terms, or the relevant class. Next, we defined a hierarchy of classes. We extracted eight superclass concepts: Action agenda, Assessment, Concrete method, Disaster type, Disaster disposition, PFA purpose, Qualification and Skill, and Reaction, then used the top-down developing method to specify the low concepts sequentially. As a result, the PFA ontology was composed of 72 classes, which each consisted of two or three levels (Fig 2).

Fig 2

Class concept hierarchy.

Following individual cases, the final psychological first aid ontology implementation of this study is as follows (Fig 3).

Fig 3

Psychological first aid ontology implementation.

Finally, after the hierarchical structures between classes had been established, we defined the attributes for each class and described its internal structure.

Any relationship can be established between ontology concepts, but this process can be difficult and complicated to infer if too many relationships are derived. In this study, an independent relationship was maintained in each superclass, and the attribute relationship between the ‘Concrete method’ and the ‘Assessment’ was set as the attribute relationship between ‘hasmethodof’ and ‘ismethodof’, and the relationship between the action agenda and the core activity was set as ‘has a’. We identified 64 subclasses and 72 Classes by consulting the collected papers and manuals. The composition resulted in a total of 166 axioms (85 logical axioms; 81 declaration axioms) [2,8-13] (Table 1).

Table 1

Ontology glossary.

No	Title	Issued year	Publisher	Author
1	Disaster and Menntal Health [8]	2015	Hakjisa	Kim et al
2	Handbook for Disaster Nursing and Emergency Prepareness [9]	2016	Jenson Books Inc	Veenema, T. G
3	Psychological first aid for disasters and trauma [10]	2014	Hakjisa	Kwon, Ahn, Choi, Joo
4	Disaster Psychological Support Manual [11]	2015	Daegu Disaster Psychological Support Center	Kim
5	Psychological first aid: Guide for field workers [12]	2011	WHO Team Mental Health and Substance Use	WHO, War Trauma Foundation and World Vision International
6	Facilitation manual: psychological first aid during Ebola virus disease outbreaks [13]	2014	World Health Organization	World Health Organization
7	Psychological first aid. [2]	2007	Journal of Mental Health Counseling	Ruzek, J.I. et al

We set the relationship between ‘Action agenda’, ‘Qualification and Skill’ and ‘Concrete method’ was as ‘guidedby’. In this study, the severity was divided into five categories by considering the Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R), which is commonly used to rate event impact. IES-R was classified as subclinical, mild, moderate, or severe (Table 2).

Table 2

Relationship design of psychological first aid ontology.

Relationship name	Domain	Range	Inverse Relationship
hasmethod	Concrete method	Assessment	ismethodof
hasmethod	Assessment	Concrete method	ismethodof
has a	Action agenda	Core activity
guidedby	Concrete method	Action agenda Qualification and Skill

In the end, we set five categories: Class, Property, Value type, Value set, and Cardinality. In particular, the severity of the existing PFA was not included, so the emphasis was placed on setting the PFA severity attribute. At this time, the PFA severity attribute was classified as Severity, and the Value type was set up with a method of selecting a specific one from the set values (Enumerated). The Value set ranged from “No symptoms” to “Extremely high level of symptoms”. Cardinality represents means the number of values that an attribute can have [7], and in this study, it was set as ‘one’ (Table 3).

Table 3

Attribute definition.

Class	Property	Value type	Value set	Cardinity
Psychological triage
	Psychological severity
		Enumerated	No symptoms	Single
		Enumerated	Few symptoms	Single
		Enumerated	Moderate symptoms	Single
		Enumerated	A High level of symptoms	Single
		Enumerated	An Extremely high level of symptoms	Single

Discussion

We extracted eight superclass concepts: Action agenda, Assessment, Concrete method, Disaster type, Disaster disposition, PFA purpose, Qualification and Skill, and Reaction, then used the top-down developing method to specify the low concepts sequentially.

PFA includes measures to stabilize survivors, to provide practical help, and to provide immediate and firm intervention to assist them to get out of the psychological crisis [2].

In this study, the ontology of PFA was set up to express the comprehensive meaning and function of PFA by using three super classes (Nature of disaster, Type of disaster, and Purpose of PFA).

This classification is consistent with the results of a previous study, [2] which indicated that the first step of PFA is to recognize various situations that accompany a disaster, and to consider the purpose of the intervention. Therefore, this attempt to conceptualize the nature and meaning of the PFA is meaningful.

The fourth superclass was divided into Acute response and Post-disaster response. The Acute response was divided into five types: physical, cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and spiritual. The post-disaster responses were divided into four types: shock phase, reaction phase, recovery phase, and reintegration phase. In previous studies, stress associated with trauma was conceptualized as a dynamic process in which the central nervous system and peripheral nervous system work: they show changes in integrated cognition, emotion, and physiological responses [14] and also show a correlation with faith and religion [15].

In contrast, during the post-disaster response, many behavioral struggles and escape reactions occur during the shock stage, and cognitive function decreases and concentration are disturbed during the reaction stage.

By this process, during the recovery stage, victims try to improve their adaptive coping ability, and during the reintegration stage, they go through a process of integrating with their own life [11,16].

Therefore, in this study, the response of PFA was classified into acute response and post-disaster response class, and this classification can help to integrate and classify the PFA response. Furthermore, we classified Qualification and Skill, and Action agenda as super classes. We divided Qualification and Skill into empathy, listen, respect, truthfulness, interest, and communication. We divided Action agenda into calm, etiquette, confidence, and practical help. These findings suggest that experts in general qualities and skills [11] should provide victims with a variety of psychological measures, including calm and listening, of which practical help contributes to solving current problems, preventing confusion and facilitating continuous recovery. Therefore, the classification set in this study will help to guide application of PFA to victims.

Finally, we divided the Concrete method superclass into two classes: Psychological triage, and Core activity. We then divided Psychological triage into subclinical, mild, moderate, and severe states. We classified Core activities into six classes: rapport formation, safety, stabilization, information provision, problem solving, and service connection. Generally, Psychological triage PFA has not been included in previous studies; instead, a classification by risk intensity centered on events was common [10], but no classification expressed in psychological reactions and changes.

However, this study is meaningful in that it evaluated and classified accurately and specifically in consideration of the ambiguity of the existing event-centered risk intensity.

We divided the core activities for PFA into (1) Building a sense of trust and stabilizing with the subject, and (2) connecting with various resources. These results are consistent with the results of previous studies in that methods such as building trust and stabilizing the subjects are emphasized as core activities in PFA. Therefore, further studies will need to identify various core activities other than the methods presented in this study.

Finally, in the superclass evaluation part, this study derived five higher concepts (Cognitive evaluation, Emotional evaluation, Physical evaluation, Behavioral evaluation, and Spiritual evaluation). A previous study [10] suggested that to ensure the focus of intervention, evaluation is essential, and that the best intervention method, and the safety of survivors by using minimal information, and these areas should consider the physical, psychological, and spiritual dimensions.

This study identified many disaster-related ontologies such as disaster resource ontology and disaster management ontology, but few papers have implemented ontology by characterizing PFA. Therefore, it is meaningful in that it provided an opportunity to characterize PFA in the event of a disaster and to apply it to actual cases.

However, characteristics of disasters can differ among countries (e.g., US: Hurricane, Japan: Earthquake), so application of this ontology to disaster cases in each country may require appropriate modifications. Therefore, future studies should develop ontologies for various types of PFA.

Conclusions

In this study, PFA ontology was implemented by using Section 101 of Health and Medical Ontology Development (Noy & McGuinness, 2001). Eight super classes were derived: Action agenda, Assessment, Concrete method, Disaster type, Disaster disposition, Purpose, Qualification and Skill, Reaction, then 64 Subclasses and 72 Classes were obtained by reference to the collected papers and manuals. The composition resulted in a total of 166 axioms 85 (Logical axioms; 81 declaration axioms).

26 Apr 2021

PONE-D-21-07927

Implementing Psychological First Aid Ontology

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Han,

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 consider all the comments.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 4 May 2021. 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: http://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,

Ahmed Mancy Mosa, 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

and

2. 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.

3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

4. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 'Nothing'

At this time, please address the following queries:

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.

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.”

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

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.

5. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 'Nothing'

a. Please complete your Competing Interests statement to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

b. This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

6. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

7. Please remove your figures from within your manuscript file, leaving only the individual TIFF/EPS image files, uploaded separately.  These will be automatically included in the reviewers’ PDF.

[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: 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: Abstract: Prepare structure abstract with scientific writing and also avoid abbreviations in the abstract section. Add brief conclusion

Introduction: Start with the problem statement and add prevalence and it current scenario globally. Further, literature is required. Rationale of the study need proper attention

Methods: This section need substantial improvement. This is review article, so its methodology should meet the review article criteria (i.e. read authors guidelines for details).

Results: Describe results, which articles were selected and what contents were added. provide the proper list of studies in this section.

Discussion: This section also need some improvements in term of the way to describe the findings in a scientific way with good language expression.

It is review article, if you add it in the topic it would be more clear and understandable for the reader.

Reviewer #2: The focus of the topic is on implementing psychological first aid ontology. This could serve as the foundation for future intervention studies. The review has been thoroughly thought out and carried out. The abstract on the other hand, was far too brief. It should provide a little more insight into the study's results, findings and conclusions.

**********

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: 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.

6 May 2021

Nothing

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

25 May 2021

Implementing Psychological First Aid Ontology

PONE-D-21-07927R1

Dear Dr. Han,

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,

Ahmed Mancy Mosa, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

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

**********

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

**********

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 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

**********

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

**********

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: Author has incorporated the changes according to the suggestions. and seems good. Kindly proceed the manuscript for further actions

**********

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

28 May 2021

PONE-D-21-07927R1

Implementing Psychological First Aid Ontology

Dear Dr. Han:

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. Ahmed Mancy Mosa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE