Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Socioeconomic and religious differentials in contraceptive uptake in western Ethiopia: a 
mixed -methods phenomenological study  
 
Version: 0 Date: 23 Jun 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Sanjay  Mohanty  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
This paper has potential to contribute to literature. However, the paper in its current form more 
appeared to be like  a report and less as scientific paper. The findings are nothing new except 
logistic regression. The following are sugg estions to improve the paper  
 
1. Dependent variable: The dependent variable should be current use and not ever use. This is 
standard in any scientific publication  
 
2. Extend the analyses: At present the analyses is limited to a logistic regression. Even the 
control variable on economic well being of the household is missing. I would suggest to try for 
modern spacing (any modern method) and permanent method (combined male and female 
sterilisation)  
 
3. Reasons for non -use of contraception should be analysed  
 
4. Family planning use should be corroborated with the fertility rate, desired for additional child  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in y our comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from t he publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any  other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please g ive details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named rep ort 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal