JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Community and Provider Perceptions and Experiences of Cervical Cancer Screening in
Rural Bolivia: A Qualitative Study
Version: 1 Date: 27 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
This is a well written and enlightening manuscript about prevailing cervical cancer screening
barriers in rural Bolivia. My specific comments below:
Major comments
1. It would be helpful to know something more about this community with regards to other rural
areas in Bolivia. What is the proportion of rural areas in the country and how heterogeneous
these communities are?  How does the study area compare to other rural areas in the country?
This is important to assess the extent to which the insights obtain from this community will
apply to others.
2. A great portion of the results section is based on inadequacy while handling or taking the
test. In that sense, I think it would be beneficial to have information on who should be taking
and handling the samples (perhaps some national guidelines) and who is actualy doing it. Do
they process the samples in a local, regional or national facility? How many intermediaries are
between sample and final delivery of results? All this would be helpful to contextualize and
better understand some the participants' comments. E.g., line 339-341: "In addition, they noted
that the handling of samples at the labs was problematic, with one provider stating that “they
[health personnel] don’t handle it [Pap test samples] well, we get samples handled poorly…
(Provider Interview 6). "
Small comments
1. Are there any differences between communities?
2. I think it'd be useful to include a word cloud (or similar text-data visualization tool), but I'll
leave this at discretion of the authors.
Title: Factors associated with recent iodine intake level among household food handlers in
southwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 14 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
The authors describe a study to understand the SDOH associated with lower iodine uptake in
this population. The authors make a good cause for its impact on public health. With that, I
recommend addressing the following to improve the manuscript:
The wording could be more concise for example: “we conducted a power analysis that indicated
478…”
I found the description of the sampling technique to be a novel approach adapted for that
community.
A part of the study is to assess the validity and reliability of the household wealth index for this
population? It would help the reader to make that clear for the resulting analysis
Perhaps there are more than 1 papers here? In one, you are conducting a validity/reliability
analysis to examine the household wealth index in this population. Paper 2: assessing social
determinants and other factors associated with iodine uptake. In the discussion, the authors cease
to describe the results of your analysis.
How do the authors describe ‘better than’ these other studies? In what way is your study unique?
In limitations, I would not describe your analysis as qualitative at all; your sampling method
was systematically assessed at the household/kebele level (structural).
Title: Factors associated with recent iodine intake level among household food handlers in
southwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 21 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This study sought to understand a communities risk for low iodine
intake - which increases risk for iodine deficiency. The study is well designed, large sample size,
in person interviews, and objective measures of iodine intake via urine samples. The manuscript
is also very well written.
The conclusion of the paper shows that despite public health efforts to improve iodine intake in
this community, the majority of women examined had inadequate intakes of iodine. The authors
review the existing literature and then recommend that such public health efforts need to be
intensified and more widely implemented.
I feel that the authors also focus areas in which existing efforts may not be working which
includes vulnerable community groups, i.e., those with out formal education and the ability to
read and write. This information will be essential for the development of new strategies and
public health efforts to meet the needs of this community.
See notes above."
Title: Factors associated with recent iodine intake level among household food handlers in
southwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version: 4 Date: 19 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
No - there are minor issues
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
No - there are minor issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Dear Authors,
I feel you have made great changes to the paper and responded to the previous reviewers
comments; however, I feel this manuscript needs further improvements prior to publication.
Below I will do my best to summarize my suggestions. I think the best step would be to share
the paper with someone who has experience publishing such work who will help you improve
the paper further.
I want to start with the title. I find your title very confusing and not accurate to what you
have done. I recommend taking out "determinants of" and replacing with "Factors associated
with "recent iodine…". Further, you use the term "triangled approach" but I don't see this
documented throughout the paper. Lastly, consider removing the person first language, "food
handling women" and change to the lead person in each household that prepared food. I realize
that you only have women; however, did not see any exclusion criteria that would rule out a
man if he was in charge of the food.
More information is needed regarding the selection of the "random" households. For example,
did the person who conducted the interviews go to random doors and knock.
Lastly, the paper is very long and this is leading to the main message of the paper to be lost.
You have a very strong study and your results are needed to improve public health efforts  -
my suggestion again is to have someone help you improve the paper to ensure the methods and
approach are more clear and the overall message is more streamlined.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
See above.
Title: Factors associated with recent iodine intake level among household food handlers in
southwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 28 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This paper has substantially improved. I appreciate that the authors
took the reviewers comments to heart and improved the paper. I feel the findings and messages
of this paper will be very useful to the literature on this topic. I enjoyed reading the paper and
the authors discussion on this topic. No further changes.
Title: “Sometimes I just forget them”: Capturing Experiences of Women about Free Menstrual
Products in a U.S. Based Public University Campus
Version: 1 Date: 28 Apr 2023
Reviewer:  Lea Sacca
Reviewer's report:
This is a topic of great public health importance. We thank the authors for shedding the light
on this issue.
1. Major re-structuring is needed. The authors mentioned the purpose of the article then included
The Socio-Cultural Impact of Menstruation and the Free Menstrual Management Product
Policies and High-Income Countries. The goal and purpose of this paper should come right
before the methods.
2. Introduction is too lengthy. The authors should narrow down the introduction to avoid
deterring the attention of the reader. The use of subtitles in the introduction is recommended.
3. Please add quotation marks before each participant quote.
4. It would be clearer if a table was added listing all themes and sub-themes aside from narrative
portion
5. In the discussion, mention the success of European countries and their policies in managing
menstrual health.
Title: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on contraceptive methods, abortion, and
unintended pregnancy: A cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 21 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for choosing me to review this interesting article. I believe that the topic of the article
is interesting and this research was necessary in the context of Iran. I really enjoyed reading the
results section and the findings were surprising to me.
I have suggested a few comments to improve the work, and I am confident that the authors will
provide accurate and logical responses.
Abstract
Within the method section, the search tools and number of questions should be specified. The
time and duration of the search must be indicated.
Within the results section, the results are fully descriptive. Analytical results must also be
provided.
In the introduction section, I expect data from Iran to be reported so that an accurate, logical and
undeniable answer can be given as to why the research was conducted.
In the introduction section, I expect data from Iran to be reported so that an accurate, logical and
undeniable answer can be given as to why the research was conducted.
Obtaining informed consent should not be mentioned in the study design section.
In the study design section, provide information about the city where the research is conducted.
For example, the geographical location and population of that city.
Considering that in Iran we have married women under 15 years old, why did you not include
them in the study?
In the Ethical Considerations section, did you do anything special for women who had illegal
abortions? Because these women are usually deprived of receiving the necessary midwifery care
in countries where abortion is performed only for medical reasons.
Were cases of illegal abortion also registered in the electronic system? Considering that this type
of abortion is a crime in a country like Iran.
I would be interested to know how the information related to illegal abortion was collected and
cited.
In the method part, I did not understand if the data collection was through contacting the women
as well or if it was only electronic data collection?
Please explain more about severe mental disorders which are among the inclusion criteria.
The term unintended pregnancy is different from unwanted pregnancy. It is necessary to use one
word throughout the text. You have used unwanted pregnancies in the results section, but there
is also unintended pregnancy in the table.
The discussion is well written and I enjoyed reading it. But the reasons for the differences and
similarities had not been well reviewed. Please consider this point in the correction phase to
increase the quality of this section.
In my opinion, the sample size in your study is appropriate, so the suggestions for future
researches should be revised. I think you can suggest that this study be done in other regions
in Iran.
Title: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on contraceptive methods, abortion, and
unintended pregnancy: A cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 04 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
-The type of study must be specified.
-It should be clarified that this study was conducted before or after the widespread corona
vaccination in Iran, certainly the behavior of individuals and families after and before receiving
the vaccine was different in terms of going to health centers and receiving counseling services
and going to receive modern prevention services. . As a factor it should be checked. Of course,
if this study was done before the start of vaccination, the results would have been different
-The number of questionnaire items should be specified. Collecting data through the Sib system
is not a completely reliable method. Especially in the time of Corona, some information has not
been recorded or has been recorded with high frequency. If no additional method was used to
ensure the correctness of the data, this issue should be mentioned as a limitation.
-In the text of the manuscript, it is mentioned that the most common cause of unwanted
pregnancy is "improper time", in this regard, more explanation is needed.
-According to the majority of abortions were spontaneous. It is possible that the lack of going
to health centers and insufficient care of the mother and fetus have led to these abortions. There
is no evidence in this regard in the text of the article. This issue needs to be investigated more
widely in the discussion section.
-In the discussion section, most of the comparisons between Iran and other developing and
underdeveloped countries (especially African countries) are made. It is better to compare
statistics with developed countries.
Title: Menopausal symptoms by HIV status and association with health-related quality of life
among women in Zimbabwe: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 29 Nov 2022
Reviewer:  Shema Tariq
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this timely and important manuscript.  As increasing
numbers of women with HIV globally reach midlife, menopause has become an important part
of clinical practice.  However, data from African countries remain sparse.  This paper is an
important contribution to our understanding of how to optimise wellbeing of women with HIV
across the life course in Zimbabwe.
My suggestions are minor- to improve an already excellent paper.
1. Throughout the manuscript and in the abstract please avoid referring to risk factors.  You
quite rightly comment that the corss-sectional design precludes assessment of causality.  This
should be reflected in the text.  Many of the factors e.g. alcohol consumption, mood, falls, could
be a consequence of menopausal symptoms.
2. In the intoroduction, please state clearly why it is important to have data from Zimbabwe
and why you can't extrapolate from US/European studies i.e. menopause is culturally patterned,
healthseeking for menopause is culturally patterned, age at menopause differs globally, and
availability of menopause care differs.
3. intro "stemming" rather than stem
4. Avoid "burden" as has negative connotations - menopause is not always necessarily bad.
5. Methods: recruited from THE HIV clinics (missing word)
6. Methods: aged 4--6- (not age)
7. Did you exclude women on hormonal contraception, those who were pregnant/lactating?  How
do you know if those without periods weren't amenorrheic for other reasons?
8. What about women with surgical menopause?
9. Please justify your approach to menopausal status ascertainment - was this modified STRAW
+10?
10. Has MRS been validated in Zimbabwe?  Did you pilot? Did you adapt?
11. Did you capture age at FMP for postmenopausal women?  That would be useful to compare?
12. Menopausal symptoms - you present menopausal symptoms, psychological and urogenital
symptoms.  What about somatic?
13. P10 is overt the best word here - consider rewording.
14. Did you have any data on attitudes/knowledge to/of menopause?
15. Menopausal hormone therapy or hormonal replacement therapy- use one of these accepted
terms
16. Did you differentiate between vaginal and systemic oestogrens?
17. What about use of traditional/herbal treatments?
18. P12 replace though with although
19. Limitations: no biological confirmation, did not include younger women (POI), MRS not
validated in HIV - may capture HIV symptoms and not menopausal symptoms.
20. Potential future work: qualitative understanding
21. I would like a bit more context about why HRT is not available and whether it is feasible to
deliver this in Zimbabwe, and if acceptable to women?
Title: Menopausal symptoms by HIV status and association with health-related quality of life
among women in Zimbabwe: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 10 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Method
in page 5 line 18: inclusion and exclusion criteria should write separately please.
in page 6 line 18:For each questionnaire, the score range should be mentioned and if it is
categorical, the cut-off should be written.
Result
in page 5 lines 17-19: Please check
in page  line 1:  It is better to present univariate and multivariate results in tables. Multivariate
results (control of other variables) should be reported in the results.
in page 11 line 4:It is better to present univariate and multivariate results in tables. Multivariate
results (control of other variables) should be reported in the results.
Discussion
in page 12 line 1:  It is better to study the results first, and then compare them with other studies,
and finally, give the reasons for the difference in the results and suggestions
in page 13 line 14: It is better to study the results first, and then compare them with other studies,
and finally, give the reasons for the difference in the results and suggestions.
in page 13 line 15: First, give a brief summary of your results and then compare them with other
studies.
in page 14 line 3 : later menarch: It is not clear and ambiguous.
Title: Sexual violence and associated factors among reproductive-age females with disabilities
in central Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis
Version: 2 Date: 07 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I thank you author/s for their unreserved work
Having said this take the following:
Regarding the title of your study it has to be time bounded which you missed it.
In you abstract part line "27-29" since it is an objective of your study; write it  as an objective.
Again same section methods lines "31-33" part why purpossive since purpossive  is non
probability, justify it. How really you arrived at the study unit? Your measurement/tool/s you
used to measure your outcome variable & its specificity, sensitivity and whether it is validated
or not and it can be applicable for your study.
Key word omit "associated factors" "line 48"
It is "Introduction" not "background" see line "66"
Lines "67 & 68"This sentence is jargon. You generalized that the countries (developing)
discriminate females with disabilities, while now a days things are getting good. So rephrase it
again/or justify as per your reference. Line "69-71" This definition advised to be at the beginning
of the paragraph.
As summary/general comment to the Introduction(background in your case), please re-write it
because the flow of ideas were fragmented and not logically synthesized. And too few references
had been used.
In Study design and setting Omit line "lines 112 & 113" since it seems an objective of your
work. And describe your study setting which is untouched.
"The details of the study settings were described elsewhere  (21)" appeared in multiple places;
so better to see it again.
The sample size calculation has to be well elaborated. I think you mean that you used single
population proportion formula, so clearly write up it. The study procedure write it up separately.
Still the flow of ideas were a big issues. Hence language problem that affected your work.
Methods part needs major revision; otherwise it is difficult to precisely what have done.
Line "137-139" Too shallow and shall be needs major revision.
Result part line "178" just write the finding in a sentence.
Again lines "181 & 182" The way you wrote does not show the mean standard age of your study
participants. So re- write it.
The model you used was jargon and needs major revision with clear write up. You can consult
the language experts for the grammar part & statistician for the statistical part.
Line "277-285"You have to recommend the policy makers as per your findings; what must be
done to tackle the problem as per your findings.
Title: Sexual violence and associated factors among reproductive-age females with disabilities
in central Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis
Version: 2 Date: 14 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
The authors assessed sexual violence among especial population. Such study is very important
to address the sexual and Reproductive health needs of women  with disabilities.
The title of the study is informative, and all components of the document are clear and well
addressed.
The followings are some of my comments that the authors may take as a constructive.
1. Abstract lines 28 and 29, the sentences are not in line with the title. Try to modify it.
2. Abstract line 31 'three districts were purposely selected....' The authors should explain why
such selection is needed.
3. Abstract, line 38 and 39, being older age is a risk factor compared to younger age. No need
of reporting the two older age groups.
4. Background section: Better to clearly show the gap of the study. It should be beyond absence
of the study in the current study area.
5. Method, line 111 and 112: Better to avoid the statement (objective). Because, indicating the
objective at the end of the background is enough.
6. The authors explained only source population. It is better if the study population is explained
as well.
7. The outcome variable of the study is 'sexual violence'. However, Whether it is life time sexual
violence or current sexual violence is not indicated. The authors need to specify it.
8. The discussion section needs a major modification.
9. some of the references including reference number 1, 4, 8, 10, 20, 22, 30, 31 are  old. The
authors need to use more updated references.