JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: The association between consumption of red and processed meats with metabolic
syndrome and its components in obese and overweight women: A cross-sectional study
Version: 0 Date: 01 Aug 2023
Reviewer:  Leila Jahangiry
Reviewer's report:
The association between consumption of red and processed meats with metabolic syndrome and
its components in obese and overweight women: A cross-sectional study
Although the aim and results of the study are valuable, there are several major concern in the
methodology and writing pattern that highly recommended for major revision.
Abstract
Results
-The results of abstract needs major revision and the words of  first line was messed up “  We
studied 231  women (mean age  36.47 ±8.44  years)”
Main text:
-In the method section, it was mention that “Women who reported total daily energy lower than
800 kcal/d or higher than 4200 kcal/d also were also excluded” how was total daily energy
measured in the study for excluding patients?
-the last line of first paragraph needs a relevant reference and exact explanations of the guideline
“All protocols were done in accordance with relevant guidelines ".  In the next paragraph refrence
14 was added to the measuring guidline that was wrong refrence to this part.
-FFq questionnaire with 147 item was introduced as vallidated version however the mentioned
refrence (15) was not a refrence related to validating a quetionnaire.  please, introduce the
questionnaire with more clear details and relavant exact refrence.
-for assessing mets components with defintion was used? ATP III? IDF? or which one? like the
other refrences refrence 22 is wrong refrence.
How was the physical activity was measured and estimated ? the refrence was wrong, too.
Title: Micronutrients intake and genetic variants associated with premature ovarian
insufficiency; MASHAD cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 07 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I recommend to reject this manuscript.
This case-control study explored the genetic variants and micronutrients levels in POI patients
and control patients. The study design, statistic analysis and results presentation were beautiful,
but I afraid that the results can not provide significant information for this field.  At first, it
well known that the micronutrients levels in post-menopausal women are different to women
of pre-menopausal women, so, the difference of micronutrients levels explored in this study
may be results of hormone chance as discussion mentioned but not gene, we can not understand
the meaning of establishing the correlation between gene and micronutrients levels. Secondly,
the compartment between case group and control group were not performed, we can not found
the difference  of micronutrients levels between POI patients and controls. The authors should
provide more clinical information for the study to explore the correlation between gene variants
and clinical features.
Title: Micronutrients intake and genetic variants associated with premature ovarian
insufficiency; MASHAD cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 25 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is well written and could be published after few minor revisions:
1. In demographic data, mentioning "height" as a variable is not recommended. As a variable is
either a result of some force or is itself the force that causes a change in another variable, which
is dependent or independent variables respectively. We do not have these characteristics in
"HEIGHT". So, it is better that delete it in Table 1 (Demographic Features).
2. The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium should be calculated for each SNP, as the Hardy-Weinberg
equilibrium is a principle stating that the genetic variation in a population will remain constant
from one generation to the next in the absence of disturbing factors.
Title: Micronutrients intake and genetic variants associated with premature ovarian
insufficiency; MASHAD cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 03 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
The study  by Mohammad Reza Mirinezhad   entitled ,, Micronutrients intake and genetic
variants associated with premature ovarian insufficiency; MASHAD cohort study”
The  manuscript falls into the journal scope. The aim of study is clear and could be interesting
for those who work with POI patients.   However manuscript contains some points that  needs
improvement before further proceeding. First of all I do agree with limitations. When there are
many it is worth to wonder if it is better to do new better study. (,,cross sectional study that
includes groups of case and control and therefore we cannot attribute causality. Second, we did
not consider the other SNPs that is possible associated with POI. Third dietary mineral intake
was not considered, which could affect the results.”). Besides
1. Although in the literature the  premature menopause refers to POI the latter has its own new
definition published t by  ESHRE group . You should mention that especially that  looking on
inclusion criteria the authors mention the threshold for FSH as 40 U/l which is the old one
2. The introduction should be shortened and refer to the main elements touching  the title of the
study . You can delete some informations  regarding POI
3. In methods you include women with FSH<40 and exclude those> 40 years and what about
40 years old . Please put the right  criteria
4. On what basis you categorized serum copper levels into three categories arbitrarily? If yes
it should be mentioned
5. What kind of vitamin D you measured, what was the ranges for all factors
6. Ednarek-Tupikowska in discussion should be written as Bednarek-Tupikowska
Title: Menstrual characteristics and associations with sociodemographic factors and self-rated
health in Spain: a cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 21 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
Review
The authors analyzed survey data to examine the relationship between menstrual variables
and sociodemographic determinants and self-rated health. The study was well written, but
requires some [mostly methodological] clarifications before approval for publication. The topic
is relevant to the field.
Comments
- In the abstract, authors should highlight the finding with self-perceived health.
- In the Methods section:
o Clarify in more detail the "sampling frame" of the study.
o Explain the validity of the variable "age at menarche", in particular whether a recall bias can
influence (and in which direction) the measured results and associations.
o To clarify, in the statistical analysis, the dependent and independent variables in the regression
models.
o The authors used multinomial regression to model ordinal outcomes (with three categories).
Why not use ordinal regression?
o In Table 3, indicate what is the "outcome" reference category used in the multinomial logistic
regression for "Menstrual bleeding abundance"?
o It is known from the literature that a logistic regression with an outcome above 10% is not
recommended. In the "Menstrual health characteristics" section, the authors mentioned that
"Over a third indicated having menstrual blood clots (35.9%)". Then, in table 3, the authors
employed a logistic regression with this outcome. Explain its application in the study.
Title: Differential diagnosis of breast mucinous carcinoma with an oval shape from
fibroadenoma based on ultrasonographic features
Version: 0 Date: 14 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for your interesting study. I think the manuscript is well prepared, however I have
some questions/ recommendations:
1- The manuscript needs  some language editing for improvement.
2-In the section "Ultrasound" you wrote: posterior features (enhancement, no posterior features).
Based on BI-RADS system we have other features such as posterior shadowing or combined
features. Why didn't you mention those features?
3- I suggest to include at least one ultrasound image for FA.
Title: Differential diagnosis of breast mucinous carcinoma with an oval shape from
fibroadenoma based on ultrasonographic features
Version: 0 Date: 18 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Nur#en Toprak
Reviewer's report:
Dear editor;
I read the study with interest. This study compares radiological imaging features of mucinous
cancers and fibroadenomas.
The summary section states the study data and the result nicely and sufficiently.
Background: The study's objective is unambiguously defined and explained.
Methods: The inclusion criterion for FAs had been stated in the study as an oval shape.
Oval-shaped lesions are considered benign and are classified as BI-RADS 3. They should be
monitored and followed up regularly. There is no indication for biopsy or excision of these
lesions. Therefore, I think the inclusion criteria were wrong in the study design.
Discussion:  While the discussion provides a comprehensive analysis of the topic at hand, it may
not contribute any novel insights to the existing body of literature.
Title: Body Mass Index and altered Lipid Profile as Major Risk Markers for Breast Cancer
Progression: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postmenopausal Women in Pakistan
Version: 1 Date: 27 Oct 2023
Reviewer:  Shah Zeb Khan
Reviewer's report:
Overall good and relevant study but i will you should rewrite especially methodology and results
part as its more written in a thesis format and its difficult to understand which Statistical test are
applied. Re write in a way that is having statistical test applied with their names and p value and
also how the results came you don't have to write independent variables and dependant variables
term again and again and also showing definition of ANOVA etc you just write in a manuscript
way mention names and which statistics done what were results. Tables also are of SPSS directly
kindly rewrite it with values and p value only shown
I hope this rephrasing and rewriting practice will make a good manuscript
Title: Body Mass Index and altered Lipid Profile as Major Risk Markers for Breast Cancer
Progression: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postmenopausal Women in Pakistan
Version: 1 Date: 01 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Farheen Shaikh
Reviewer's report:
The research is constrained. the more data is required to analyze the association of breast cancer
with obesity and disturb  lipid profile. There are many causative factors, but nowadays it is
important to work on a cellular level.  Breast cancer and the cell cycle and its restriction points
are very important.
Title: Body Mass Index and altered Lipid Profile as Major Risk Markers for Breast Cancer
Progression: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postmenopausal Women in Pakistan
Version: 4 Date: 25 Jan 2024
Reviewer:  Faisal Gulzar
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors, following a thorough review of your manuscript titled "BMI, Central Obesity, and
Lipid Profile as Major Risk Markers for Breast Cancer Progression: A Cross-Sectional Study
of Pakistani Postmenopausal Women," I have identified some minor issues that require your
attention before publication:
1. Author List:
There are grammatical mistakes in the author list. Kindly make the necessary corrections for
the final version.
2. Introduction:
• In the introduction part, 23 references are cited. However, in the methodology section,
references 24-26 have been skipped. Please ensure consistency in citation.
3. Methodology:
• Read the complete manuscript and try to correct any identified grammatical mistakes.
• The term “was” had been used for data, please correct this.
• You mentioned the postmenopausal age (45-65 years) in the sample size section; therefore,
there is no need to repeat it in subsequent paragraphs.
• It appears that incorrect references (27 and 28) have been added. Instead of data from the
Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, the wrong references were included. Please correct this.
4. Statistical Analysis:
• The section lacks clarity, its better only mentions the statistical test used for this study. It would
be more appropriate to separate this from the results section. There is no need to mention tables
2-4.
5. Discussion Section:
• In this section, references 24-26 have been mentioned. It is advisable to renumber the sequence
as per the methodology section.
Your prompt attention to these matters is appreciated. Thank you for your cooperation, and we
look forward to receive  the final corrected draft.
Title: Age and Race/Ethnicity Differences in Decisional Conflict in Women Diagnosed with
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Version: 2 Date: 31 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
This study addressed an important topic in DCIS treatment, patient feelings around  treatment
decision making. The findings are interesting and may inform future studies or decision aid
tools. I have some suggested edits that may strengthen this article.
Introduction:
I think having some more background information on DCIS would be helpful to readers unaware
of some of the issues with this diagnosis (e.g. sometimes DCIS is over diagnosed or may never
progress to invasive cancer).
Lines 86-87: Is it possible to find newer references than these cited? Surveillance data can
become outdated rather quickly. Additionally, a lot of your references are a bit older, so it may
be worthwhile to check to see if newer references are available, particularly for data, medical
guidelines, etc. Oncology is rapidly changing with precision medicine, molecular testing, etc.
Lines 98-99:  Should you cite here the studies that have examined decisional conflict in DCIS?
Methods: line 144: Having the survey only available in the English language may be a study
limitation given the demographic characteristics of KP members.
Did you do any pilot testing to see if this tool resonated with patients in your health system?
When was the survey conducted? Please add in this information.
Line 184: Per federal government OMB standards, the term "Alaska Native" is used to refer to
Indigenous people of Alaska. There are several places in the manuscript and tables where you
may want to change "Alaskan" to "Alaska Native" to avoid confusion.
Since you may have checked that your model met requirements for linear regression, you may
want to note that in the methods section (e.g. examined residuals, checked for linearity, etc.).
Lines 252-253: That's an interesting finding. Would older women have preferred treatment
decisions be made primarily by the physician?
Line 275: Additionally, this age group who hasn't gone through natural menopause yet may be
bothered more by symptoms from hormonal therapy than older women, and this can negatively
impact their quality of life.
Line 310: Do you have any information on non respondents? Did they differ on demographic
characteristics?
Table 1: Given that you did a cross sectional survey, I would suggest removing the word "cohort"
because that implies you followed this group over time (either prospectively or retrospectively).
I think it would be helpful to add in the variable "time since diagnosis" to table 1 so readers have
a better grasp that some patients were more recently diagnosed than others in this study. Also, I
would suggest using the same categorical label for the "other" racial category across tables.
Title: Age and Race/Ethnicity Differences in Decisional Conflict in Women Diagnosed with
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Version: 2 Date: 22 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
Plain language summary could be more lay friendly. Noted word quantifies, and decisional
conflict. Perhaps replace with "help to understand" and "make decisions about their care". The
summary did not have a lay expression of what decisional conflict is. My understanding of lay
summary is that it should be understood by a third grader.
Statistics in introduction need updating to more current references on DCIS. 2014 is almost a
decade ago.
Introduction should explore the attributes of decisional conflict more and define it to the
audience.
Line 100, need a comma before but
How did the authors control for correlations in the models on SES?
Do the authors think the study had any significant nonresponse bias? How does the population
of women who completed the survey compare to the women who did not?
This study does not directly address if women understand the difference between DCIS and
invasive breast cancer, unless this is specifically asked in the survey? If so, please provide
supporting results for how education about how these two differ is needed to support women in
decision making on treatment for DCIS. How will DVDs help a generation of younger women
in decision making? How could social media be used to achieved education goals would be
more relevant.
Well written article overall, easy to read and follow. Languages and stats are a little dated in
places, but agree it is an important social topic that warrants public discussion and awareness
in the medical community.
Title: Age and Race/Ethnicity Differences in Decisional Conflict in Women Diagnosed with
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Version: 3 Date: 29 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for addressing my comments. The revised version is much improved, and I think it
will help health care practitioners and researchers consider how to better address DCIS among
populations who need more information and guidance about treatment decisions.
I have only one minor comment. At line 89 on page 5, the word "with" probably should be
replaced with "will."
Title: Prevalence, pain intensity and symptoms associated with primary dysmenorrhea: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 3 Date: 22 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript describes the results of an online survey of Brazilian women reporting on
severity of menstrual pain and associated symptoms. Strengths of the study are the large sample
sized. However, there are concerns about the methods and data analysis as well, which I have
described in detail.  Additionally, the manuscript would benefit from an English language
revision.  A number of sentences throughout the paper have misspellings and missing words and
are worded awkwardly.  Specific concerns are highlighted below.
1. In the introduction, it would be helpful if the authors could describe why it is important to
identify prevalence data and possible risk factors in Brazilian women.  Could there potentially
be cultural factors that impact the prevalence?
2. The authors offer very limited information on the measures used and no citations.  The 11-
point NRS scale has many citations that can be included, but it is not clear what other measure
was used to evaluate additional symptoms of dysmenorrhea.  The authors should provide more
detail about this measure, including a list of the questions if it is not already published.
3. The data analytic approach seems very complicated with many, many statistical tests.  I think
there would be value in the authors re-thinking their approach, and perhaps including all of the
symptoms in a single regression.  Each of the variables are likely highly correlated, which is
why there are significant findings for each.
4. The authors must mention the limitation of potential recall bias when trying to estimate pain
intensity for 3 months and 5 years earlier. Additionally, it is highly likely that at least some of
the participants in the study do have secondary dysmenorrhea, but have never been diagnosed
with any such condition.  The authors must include this as a limitation.
Title: Prevalence, pain intensity and symptoms associated with primary dysmenorrhea: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 3 Date: 26 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript describes the results of a cross-sectional analysis of symptoms associated
with menstrual pain using a questionnaire offered over the internet. The results are somewhat
interesting. However, the manuscript requires significant editorial and methodological
modification. The  results and methods section  need improve. The suggestions are below:
1 It should be ‘symptoms’ ? In your study you don’t have inrofmation about factors.
Abstract:
More symptoms have been desribed in “conclusion” than result. I suggest that results and
conclusion should be about this same  information.
Method:
98: Don’t use “e.g”, please  add the  questions from questionnaire
113 You don’t need to use “PD-related pain” primary dysmennorhea means painful menstruation
and part “related pain” is unnecessary
113 “: 1 and 3 months and 5 years prior to their response” Describe this part more precisely.
Did women fill the quesionnaire 3 times?
I suggest, add flow diagram
148 Pleas don’t write “most” in results section, better is when you based only on numbers
150 It should be “last”?
158 as above
158 -160 please add the numbers to the results
162-168. Pleas describe the data. This is long and illegible sentence. Add p-value for every
symptoms
170-178 - Numerical values should be added to main text
192-196 – In my opinion, you should compare yours results to other countries.
201-203 this sentence is unclear
Title: Prevalence, pain intensity and symptoms associated with primary dysmenorrhea: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 09 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
1. The Abstract should clarify that PD is menstrual pain without an identified cause, such as
endometriosis.
2. In the Abstract, it’s not clear why there are 3 separate percentage estimates for the moderate
and severe dysmenorrhea categories.
3. Line 44, it’s not clear whether the authors mean dysmenorrhea or PD, specifically, in the
statement about the WHO.  Also, it is not a “cause” of chronic pelvic pain, per se, so this sentence
should be motivated.
4. Line 45, this describes some aspects of the pathophysiology of PD, but the complete
pathophysiology of PD for many women remains unknown.
5. Line 72, it would be helpful to clarify that the sample from the study identified women across
Brazil (not just in the Northeast region), which is the justification for the study.
6. Line 87 – please clarify what is meant by “menacme”.
7. The statistical approach and data presented in Table 4 is confusing.  The authors reported
using a regression analysis and chi-square test, but it’s not clear how these tests differentiate the
various symptom frequencies for each the mild/moderate/severe PD groups.  Was the chi square
test only applied to those with moderate or severe PD?  I fear that eliminates what may be some
important findings for the mild group.
8. All of the symptoms are likely highly correlated, and I think it would be useful to rethink the
analyses and consider creating a composite score.
9. The Discussion fails to integrate the findings with the literature appropriately.  For example,
Chen and colleagues have published quite a bit on various symptoms and phenotypes of
dysmenorrhea using a similar symptom list.  Examining the approach used by her lab might shed
some additional light on how to approach the analyses.
Title: Prevalence, pain intensity and symptoms associated with primary dysmenorrhea: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 7 Date: 15 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Overall the paper is much improved and the rationale for the study is much clearer than its
previous version.  I have only a few minor comments regarding grammar, detailed below:
Line 46: “the completely pathophysiology…”
Line 107: “changes were made to adequate the questionnaire…”
Line 157: “..had more than 11 years of scholarly.”