[PRE REVIEW]: rhap: A tool to analyze health impacts attributable to household air pollution

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @jonsampedro (Jon Sampedro)
Repository: https://github.com/bc3LC/rhap
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/359256d28b1759db98f80f3e54710274"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/359256d28b1759db98f80f3e54710274/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/359256d28b1759db98f80f3e54710274/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/359256d28b1759db98f80f3e54710274)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @jonsampedro. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@jonsampedro if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1186/1476-069X-12-77 is OK
- 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00126-1 is OK
- 10.15185/izawol.363.v2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105456 is OK
- 10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00133-X is OK
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0245729 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04015 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Tracking SDG 7: The Energy Progress Report

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.98  T=4.74 s (25.3 files/s, 387773.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CSV                             42         306325              0        1519091
HTML                            37           1839            493           5315
XML                              3              9              0           2064
R                               15            392            675           1423
CSS                              3             99             48            428
JavaScript                       4             64             34            266
YAML                             7             34             11            190
Markdown                         3             59             32            169
TeX                              1             12              0             75
Rmd                              3             51             93             32
Text                             1              4              0             13
SVG                              1              0              1             11
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           120         308888           1387        1529077
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    57	Jon Sampedro
    44	klau506
     1	Clàudia Rodés Bachs
     1	jonsampedro

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

⚠️ Wordcount for paper.md is 1493

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

gcamreport: An R tool to process and standardize GCAM outputs
Submitting author: @klau506
Handling editor: @martinfleis (Active)
Reviewers: @bpbond, @ibarraespinosa
Similarity score: 0.6913

pollucheck v1.0: A package to explore open-source air pollution data
Submitting author: @adithirugis
Handling editor: @ajstewartlang (Active)
Reviewers: @nmstreethran, @ibarraespinosa
Similarity score: 0.6754

eixport: An R package to export emissions to atmospheric models
Submitting author: @ibarraespinosa
Handling editor: @leeper (Retired)
Reviewers: @jhollist
Similarity score: 0.6663

inAccessMod: An R package to automate data downloading and processing for AccessMod
Submitting author: @ptimoner
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @ConnorDonegan, @mponce0
Similarity score: 0.6636

localcovid19now: processing and mapping COVID-19 case data at subnational scales
Submitting author: @sjbeckett
Handling editor: @galessiorob (Active)
Reviewers: @richelbilderbeek, @mbkumar, @welch16, @Epic19mz
Similarity score: 0.6576

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[kthyng]

Hi @jonsampedro and thanks for your submission! I am looking for some specific items to make sure your submission fits our requirements at a high level (not at the more detailed review level) before moving on to finding an editor or putting this on our waitlist if no relevant editors are available. I'll comment over time as I have a chance to go through them:

• OSI-approved license
• Installation instructions
• Documentation exists at all
• Tests of some sort
• Check paper (make sure compiles, read through, check for length 250-1000 words)
• Substantial scholarly effort
• Clear research application

In the meantime, please take a look at the comments above ⬆️ from the editorialbot to address any DOI, license, or paper issues if you're able (there may not be any), or suggest reviewers. For reviewers, please suggest 5 reviewers from the database listed above or your own (non-conflicted) extended network. Their github handles are most useful to receive but please don't use "@" to reference them since it will prematurely ping them.

[jonsampedro]

Thank you, @kthyng!

There don’t seem to be any DOI or paper-related issues, but please let me know if you need any additional information.

For reviewers, I suggest the following:

• Paul Taconet
• Nan-Hung Hsieh
• slwu89
• Ciara Donegan
• nistara
• Longhao Wang
• meenakshi-kushwaha

Thanks again!

Best,
Jon