JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Patterns in the Prevalence and Wealth-based Inequality of Cervical Cancer Screening in
India
Version: 2 Date: 01 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
In my opinion, the analyzed topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. This
study assesses the prevalence of cancer cervix screening among women in 30 to 49 years age-
group and its relation to demographic, social and economic factors. I think that the abstract of
this article is very clear and well structured.
In my opinion, the discussion could be studied in depth and extended. Maybe, it could be useful
the evaluation of the outcomes of these patients in order to highlight the importance of the
screening. In particular, I suggest these articles to get deeper in the topic: PMID: 36992282,
PMID: 37149905. Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and completed.
Considered all these points, I think it could be of interest for the readers and, in my opinion, it
deserves the priority to be published after minor revisions
Title: Patterns in the Prevalence and Wealth-based Inequality of Cervical Cancer Screening in
India
Version: 2 Date: 03 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
This study assesses the prevalence of cervical cancer screening among women in 30 to 49 years
age-group and its relation to demographic, social and economic factors. I think that the study is
well structurated and also the layout is good.  In my opinion the discussion could be expanded
in order to explain all the aspects of cervical cancer. This could be useful in order to sentitize
women and also the role of the screening. Because of this, i suggest these articles to do what
explained: PMID: 35909005 PMID: 33140628 . Considered what said before, I think it could
be of interest for the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority to be published after
minor revisions.
Title: Patterns in the Prevalence and Wealth-based Inequality of Cervical Cancer Screening in
India
Version: 3 Date: 22 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled “Patterns in the Prevalence and Wealth-based
Inequality of Cervical Cancer Screening in India”, topic interesting enough to attract readers'
attention
The quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made. The methodology
is accurate, and conclusions are supported by data analysis. The discussions are clear and
comprehensive. References are relevant to the search.
Considering all these points, I think it could be of interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it
deserves the priority to be published.
Title: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome
affected: a randomized controlled trial
Version: 3 Date: 01 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Manal Nasih Ahmed Hamdan
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations .Good job and interesting manuscript
*Just a few language corrections :
Also=also,
In the discussion
OOCYTE=oocyte
Finding presents
Different types of gonadotropins
*Conclusion: Please rewrite it to be more brief and informative
Title: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome
affected: a randomized controlled trial
Version: 3 Date: 07 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the article titled: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian
stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome affected: a randomized controlled trial
In this study, the authors aims to study the efficiency of minimal-OS method in treatment of
infertile patients with PCOS and also the effect of gonadotropin type (recombinant FSH (r-
FSH) vs urinary Human menopausal gonadotropin (u-HMG)) on treatment cycles with GnRH-
antagonist.
Specific comments
1. Methods:
Ovum was picked up after 36 hours .on what bases the author depend in delaying ovum pickup
to greater than 36 hours ?
Many articles depende on delaying ovum pick up in special condition .what was the exact
protocol the author used as this point is crucial in the method and can highly affect the result.
Al Rahwanji, M.J., Abouras, H., Shammout, M.S. et al. The optimal period for oocyte retrieval
after the administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin in in vitro fertilization.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth22, 184 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04412-9
2- how many cases had cancellation due to poor out come
3- how many cases were prone to freeze all policy ?what was their protocol?
4- the authors mentioned the the secondary outcome as quality od oocytes and embryos .what
was the quality scoring system they used to measure should be mentioned in method
Discussion
Regarding the correlation of ivf and breast cancer I got through the referenecs mentioned which
concentrate on the relation of early menarche and late menopause as correlation to breast cancer
instead recognizing pregnancy as protective measure of breast cancer  I suggest you change the
refrences to another supporting your idea or you delete this comment
“Overall epidemiological studies have revealed that age at menarche is a stronger determinant
of breast cancer risk than age at menopause.
Functional studies have been performed using rodent models to show that the protection afforded
by parity against breast cancer is hormonally driven and may involve mammary stem cells.”
Dall GV, Britt KL. Estrogen effects on the mammary gland in early and late life and breast
cancer risk. Front Oncol. 2017; https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2017.00110
14. Karimzadeh MA, Ahmadi S, Oskouian H, Rahmani E. Comparison of mild stimulation and
conventional stimulation in ART outcome. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010; https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00404-009-1252-4
Title: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome
affected: a randomized controlled trial
Version: 3 Date: 13 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for diverting the article entitled as
Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome affected:
a randomized controlled trial
for second peer reviewing
The followings are just my points of interest to be explored more
Title: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome
affected: a randomized controlled trial
Version: 5 Date: 11 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for diverting this paper to me for peer reviewing. As far as I remember
I have already sometime ago reviewed this article and approved it for publishing as I agree
totally with the results obtained by the author, The  statistical methods, and the discussion. Yet,
I questioned strongly the manner in which randomization has been achieved at that time.
In the new draft this time the author has explained adequately that an experienced epidemiologist
has conducted the randomization with use of highly reputable software STATA. Accordingly,
I have nothing left to object or question this paper for publishing and hope that my humble
comments satisfy you, author and journal authorities.
Thanks indeed for submitting this paper to me
Wisam Akram
Consultant and assistant professor
Gynecology & Obstetrics
Mustansiriyah Medical College
Title: Introduce an optimal method of ovarian stimulation in the polycystic ovarian syndrome
affected: a randomized controlled trial
Version: 8 Date: 19 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for following the advices we have given you and making changes where appropriate,
however, I believe that there are few more points that you need to address  as follows :
Methode:
1. Line 129: Add the citation
2. Add the guidelines you follow in this study
3. Line 130 : Please mention the duration of infertility
4. line 151: Please be clear whether all patients did embryo transfer without anasthesia ? clear
this point? is there any difficulty in transfer? frozen or fresh ?please make these points clear
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 2 Date: 11 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
1.  It would be nice if the  title  includes translation  for the fact that translation is one of the major
parts of the process like "Translation, Reliability, and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of
the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score questionnaire"
2.   In the introduction part, it is paramount to mention why you prefer the POP-SS to other
similar tools
3. What does ensuring the adequacy of the sample means? It would be nice to state why? like
to protect against dropouts and missing responses
4. What were your exclusion/ inclusion criteria, Did you consider fluency of their language
5. What kind of prolapse stage system was used and who examined them? was/were the examiner
blinded?
6.  where is the supporting information? Sidaamu Afoo version of the POP-SS?English version
of the POP-SS?
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 2 Date: 14 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
In my opinion, the analyzed topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. This
study aimed to translate and adapt the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score into Sidaamu Afoo
and evaluate its psychometric properties. I think that the abstract of this article is well organized
and clear.
In my opinion, the discussion could be studied in depth and extended. Maybe, it could be useful
the evaluation of the possible treatments of this disease . In particular I suggest these two articles
PMID: 28786873, PMID: 30324854. Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and
completed. Considered all these points, I think it could be of interest for the readers and, in my
opinion, it deserves the priority to be published after minor revisions.
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 2 Date: 14 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Congratulations for conducting this study for your high-needs population.
I consider your work to be highly valuable for access to an otherwise hard to reach population;
until important and validated tools such as yours are available, it is hard to objectively quantify
the burden, impact and evaluation of interventions. Well done!
Your paper is generally very well written and I have little further suggestions for improvement.
However, I do have a few queries perhaps worthy of your attention and inclusion and these are
more specifically relating to the methodology:
1. with the very high level of illiteracy, it is unclear to me how the questionnaire information
was relayed to the study subjects.. the way the questions are communicated to the women may
influence how the participants respond and may therefore play a role in bias
2. the gynaecologist-led POP-Q stage examination - these were performed, as I understand, by
a single gynaecologist? It may be helpful to clarify aspects such as blinding, contribution and
reference of techniques, for added clarity.
Other than that, many thanks for your contribution and adjustments. I look forward to seeing
this as a successful publication in the near future.
Kind regards,
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 2 Date: 15 May 2023
Reviewer:  Rohna Kearney
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. It clearly reflects a comprehensive
study to validate the POP-SS questionnaire in Sidaamu Afoo. I am sure this will be a valuable
tool to allow patients, clinicians and researchers understand the effects of prolapse and its
treatment.
Reference 1 has been omitted from the introduction
Line 328-330 is not clear. Can this be rephrased?
The author of reference 23 should be written as Reid F.
I presume the questionnaire was administered orally as you have stated 91% can't read or write.
The POP-SS has not been validated to administer verbally. I appreciate there is no option with
such a high proportion of women not reading or writing but this should be discussed as a
limitation to the validity and a difference from the original intended delivery of the tool.
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 5 Date: 03 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled " Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo
version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score questionnaire ”, topic interesting enough
to attract readers' attention.
In the "Authors' response" section, I read that the authors added one suggested to the
introduction, and completed the section. But I recommend adding this reference also in the
References section because do not appear.
I think it would be interesting to complete the Discussion section by explaining various
therapeutic strategies for the management of this disease, considering the other study suggested.
Although the quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made, I believe that
adding these latest changes becomes complete and exhaustive on the current scientific evidence
on the topic of the study.  (PMID: 28786873, PMID: 30324854.)
Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and completed. Considering this point, I
think it deserves the priority to be published after minor revisions.
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 6 Date: 11 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled " Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo
version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score questionnaire” , topic interesting enough
to attract readers' attention
The quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made. The methodology
is accurate, and conclusions are supported by data analysis. The discussions are clear and
comprehensive. References are relevant to the search.
Considering all these points, I think it could be of interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it
deserves the priority to be published.
Title: Reliability and validity of the Sidaamu Afoo version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Symptom Score questionnaire
Version: 6 Date: 12 Jun 2023
Reviewer:  Rohna Kearney
Reviewer's report:
Although the point by point response document sent to me did not include my review I have
noted the suggestions I had have been actioned. I recommend that the manuscript is published.
Title: A randomized controlled pilot trial to assess the effectiveness of a specially formulated
food supplement and pelvic floor muscle training in women with stress-predominant urinary
incontinence
Version: 3 Date: 29 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear author, your study is interesting and has an impressive topic. It looks at SUI from a new
perspective, but you must improve it, especially the discussion part..Please work on the parts
especially I mentioned below..
1) Your introduction (background) section is too long fort his study. Please shorten this part and
only include important information.
2) Lots of information in the background and methods section seems to be repeated especially
in the early parts of the discussion section. In addition, the results of the study has often been
repeated in the discussion section. Please make your discussion section clear…
3) I see that you talk about zinc, magnesium, leucine etc. by giving quite long information in the
discussion section and you explain its effects quite a lot. Please exclude this parts and shorten.
These sentences can be in the introduction (background) part of the study..Your discussion with
important studies in the literature is very poor..
4) If you need a plan for discussion section, first you can give the impressive results shortly in
the first paragraph, your article’s first paragraph is enough for this. Then you can discuss the SUI
and PFMT exercises and PFMT exercises and food suplements. You can give some literature
abstracts and discuss important referances here. You can compare the study results with these
literature search results. Than you can give the limitations of the study. You can end discussion
with the most important or amazing finding of your study when compared to the literature, and
in conclusion section you can give the impressive points of your study and you can mention
what this study brings to the literature.
Title: A randomized controlled pilot trial to assess the effectiveness of a specially formulated
food supplement and pelvic floor muscle training in women with stress-predominant urinary
incontinence
Version: 3 Date: 24 Apr 2023
Reviewer:  Kadir Bakay
Reviewer's report:
This is a well prepared RCT with some drawbacks such as:
1: Inadaquate sample size,
2: Not using urodynamic evaluation to assess urinary incontinence,
3: Not continuing PMFT for at least 12 weeks,
which were all mentioned in the text however pointing out the limitations of the study does not
make them irrelevant.
I would consider acceptance if the title of the study and relevant parts in the text clearly state
that the findings are preliminary.
Title: A randomized controlled pilot trial to assess the effectiveness of a specially formulated
food supplement and pelvic floor muscle training in women with stress-predominant urinary
incontinence
Version: 5 Date: 04 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors, your introduction section is still too long.  Although the number of sample size
is anedaquate, you seem to offer a different perspective on urinary incontinence and PFMT. I
see you have improved the discussion section, so the manuscript looks good for publication.
Thanks for your work..
Title: A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women
Version: 1 Date: 22 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
While thanking the respected authors for choosing an important topic, some  comments are
suggested in this study:
1-The title can be edited as follows:A mixed methods study of domestic violence against women
2-The objective can also be written as follows:
Investigate the prevalence and experiences of domestic violence in women
3-Considering the sensitivity of the title of the study, it seems that more important points should
be raised in ethical considerations.
4-How was the trustworthiness of the study evaluated?
5-It seems that the number of references for a mix method study is small.
Title: A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women
Version: 1 Date: 29 May 2023
Reviewer:  Kamuran Özdi#l
Reviewer's report:
Dear author(s),
I think that the issue of domestic violence against women has been comprehensively addressed. I
have stated my suggestions for the article below. I think that the study is suitable for the magazine
reader and will contribute to the literature. I believe that it can be published in case of major
revision.
I wish the authors good luck in the publication process.
Yours sincerely.
Suggestions:
• Research questions can be added after the introduction. After the research purpose, research
questions can be written.
• “Credibility and trustworthiness” sections related to qualitative research should be added to
the method.
• The “reflexivity” section about qualitative research should be added in the Methods section.
• First, quantitative research was conducted and qualitative data were collected from among the
participants here. I didn't quite understand this. Can it be written more clearly?
• It must be specified whether the COREQ checklist is used in the method.
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly written.
• I see that there are very important themes of qualitative data. However, I think these themes
are themes that will be re-read and shared a lot. Thus, repetitions can be avoided and the main
result of the study can be emphasized
Title: Risk of uterine leiomyomata with menstrual and reproductive factors in premenopausal
women: Korea Nurses’ Health Study
Version: 0 Date: 25 Apr 2023
Reviewer's report:
This study is significant in that it is the first longitudinal study to provide valuable insights into
the association between reproductive factors and uterine leiomyoma (UL) risk in premenopausal
Korean women. Overall, the article is well-written, concise, and each section from the
introduction to the conclusion is written for its purpose and is not difficult to understand.
However, there are some potential limitations to consider:
Lack of generalizability: the study only focused on premenopausal Korean female nurses, which
may limit its generalizability to other populations.
Self-reported data: This study relied on self-reported data that may be subject to recall bias and
social desirability bias.
Limited information on UL diagnosis: The study did not provide detailed information on
the diagnostic methods used to identify UL cases. The accuracy of UL diagnosis may vary
depending on the imaging technique.
Most of the above limitations have been addressed in the discussion section of this study, so
they do not need to be mentioned or supplemented.
However, given that the study only included nurses, it is concerning that the researchers did not
explore whether their various occupational risk factors contribute to the development of UL. This
is because in addition to unmodifiable factors such as age, genetics, and reproductive factors,
occupational factors such as nurses' work schedules and job stress, which can lead to hormonal
imbalances, may also play a role in the development of UL. It is known that women in certain
occupations, such as healthcare workers, have a higher incidence of UL than women in other
occupations. This suggests that occupational factors may play a role in the development of UL.
Therefore, it would be beneficial to further analyze the study to include occupational factors
if possible. If this is difficult to do, or if data on occupational factors were not collected, the
limitations of excluding occupational factors should be described.
Title: Risk of uterine leiomyomata with menstrual and reproductive factors in premenopausal
women: Korea Nurses’ Health Study
Version: 1 Date: 15 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
I have carefully reviewed the revised version of your manuscript and I am pleased to inform you
that it has been accepted for publication. I commend you on the thorough revisions you made
to the manuscript, addressing all the concerns and suggestions raised during the review process.
I would like to congratulate you on the acceptance of your manuscript and I look forward to
seeing it published in our journal.
Title: Characteristics of Breast Cancers Detected by Screening Mammography in Taiwan: A
Single Institute’s Experience
Version: 4 Date: 20 Jul 2022
Reviewer:  Deependra Singh
Reviewer's report:
I don't feel the authors understands the complete dimension of mammography screening
programme, interval cancers (with and without symptoms/mammography +/- findings), and how
they are measured in population-based mammography screening programme.
Comment:  Removal of clinical cases from screening programmes just to show effective
mammography screening programme is not ideal. Clinical cases reported at mammography
screening, if left or removed from the programme, will be very difficult to follow-up… then the
programme or health system can’t evaluate the outcomes in those presented with symptoms at the
screening visit as compared to those who were presented with symptoms outside the screening
programme (including those who had negative mammography result in the last screening visit).