JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Obesity at age 20 and weight gain during adulthood increase risk of total and premature
all-cause mortality: Findings from women attending breast screening in Manchester
Version: 4 Date: 01 Dec 2022
Reviewer:  Emmanuel Biracyaza
Reviewer's report:
I would like to appreciate the efforts of the authors in improving this manuscript. Only few
comments remains:
1. The authors have to proof read this manuscript for correcting the typos errors.  example;
- Lines 55-56, there is a missing of an adverb "like respectively" to facilitate the readers to know
which prevalence of overweight and obesity"
- On line 87, this sentence must be removed "a finding also observed in the Predicting Risk of
Cancer At Screening (PROCAS) study"
- Write correctly the words such as "adulthood" on line 94 and "multiple imputations" on line
175.; on lines  261-262, write "imputation databases"
- on line 198; what is weight  cf?
- On line 418, write "Whilst analyses of the PROCAS previously established that …"
2. In background (lines 91-95), the authors are not indicating a research gap in which they are
addressing or what interests them in conducting this study. They can respond to this question :
What is not known in the previous study in which you are interested investigate? The objective
and hypotheses are were designed.
3. In methods sections; line 107-108, the study designs remains incorrect. The PROCAS is
cannot be a study design.  Based on the nature of your study, you can write that you conducted
a retrospective cohort study design  with women who attended the Greater Manchester NHS-
BCP and got breast cancer risk estimates  because of taking part in PROCAS.
3.  Regarding the tables, the authors have to check well. For example; in table 3, you cannot use
both "1 "and "reference" because they are epidemiologically the same. You have to use one of
them. Also, check if the reference group "healthy weight" is at a good position/place. I think it
should be on the first or last line to make it representative.
4. On lines 43-434; Which action that has to be prioritized and who has to take it? You can
specify who have to take such actions or strategies. Also, the recommendation to the future
researchers provided on line 345 should separated from the previous recommandation to the
policy makers. You need to rephrase it. Which future study do you this is important? Is ti
longitudinal or prospective study design for  investigating what ?  For example; you can specify
that future longitudinal study design can measure the cost-effectiveness of the program...
Notice: The activities done in the past must be presented in the past tense, that is why in
proofreading they have to pay attending on the tenses.
Title: Obesity at age 20 and weight gain during adulthood increase risk of total and premature
all-cause mortality: Findings from women attending breast screening in Manchester
Version: 5 Date: 15 Dec 2022
Reviewer:  Emmanuel Biracyaza
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank the authors for responding adequately to each of my comments and
changing accordingly to reflect their responses in the manuscript.  This is my time to recommend
this study for acceptance for publication.
Regards
Title: Are Delay Ages at Marriage Increasing? Pre-Marital Sexual Relation among Youth People
in the Place of Residence in India
Version: 3 Date: 17 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
The paper "Are Delay Ages at Marriage Increasing? Pre-Marital Sexual Relation among Youth
People in the Place of Residence in India" deals with two very important topics age at marriage
and risk of unsafe sex especially among adolescent and youth population group. In my view both
topics need to be a separate paper to  have space to show deeper analysis of the problem and also
suggest implications and recommendations. The main outcome is having episode of pre-marital
sex so need not show two data tables on age at marriage rather explain the implications of this
delay in marriage. Also, given that India still has issues of child marriage is delay in marriage
happening across geographies.
Paper states that "The present study deal with the premarital sexual behaviour among the youth
people due to delay age at marriage in India, and the analysis is based on information collected
from 169,814 unmarried women of age 15–49 and 40,273 unmarried men of age 15–49 (IIPS,
2017). "  But married women and men could have had pre-marital sex but are not represented in
the current sample and analysis. What implications this would have is not discussed. In my view
the out variable for regression should be 'had experienced pre-marital  sex' and rural/urban, age
categories should also be part of independent variables. Also the main predictor be 'had delayed
marriage'  which would need to be defined and others as controls. Also implications of having
pre-marital sex like was it safe or not could be discussed  further. The authors have done a good
job of reviews however the analysis needs to be strengthened further.
Title: Are Delay Ages at Marriage Increasing? Pre-Marital Sexual Relation among Youth People
in the Place of Residence in India
Version: 3 Date: 31 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
The paper is quite relevant in the present times. However I have certain observations to make:
1. The English language of the paper needs to be improved.
2. Wherever the tables/ figures are showing certain trends, some probable explanation about the
trends will give more quality. For e.g Table No 4 &5 which talks about age at marriage and age
at initiation to premarital sex, the authors can provide some explanation on why premarital sex
is higher among rural youth especially for those below 18 years.
3. In its conclusion the author has only mentioned about early initiation of sexual activity among
educated and rich class and provided some policy recommendations. He authors can provide
more recommendations about ASRH programs and services in rural areas to adolescents and
young men and women
4. Inclusion of above points will enhance the quality of paper, hence these may be taken into
account.
Title: Determinants of Breast Self-Examination practice among women attending pastoralist
health facilities, southern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 01 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Introduction
pIt says ‘The likelihood of survival from breast cancer is greatest when there is appropriate
screening…’’But, the American Cancer Society no longer recommends BSE as a an early
detection measure for woman with an average risk of breast cancer. Various studies showed
BSE does not lead to reduction in mortality due to breast cancer compared to no screening at all.
Methods
The psychometric properties (reliability and validity) of the data collection instrument are not
mentioned.
Please add a reference for the development of the questionnaire.
How did you make sure that BSE practice is done properly with the questionnaire you have
administered?
Do you think ‘ever performed BSE’ in the last 12 months indicate BSE practice?
It is not clear about the measurement of knowledge, attitude and practice outcomes. It is not
well defined about good/poor knowledge or attitude?  AND BSE practice or no BSE practice
is not well defined?
Results
BSE knowledge did not assess the women’s knowledge how to perform BSE.
How family history of breast cancer included in the knowledge section?
Discussion
The references are unique for studies conducted at different place.
The limitation section said ‘this study is not with some limitations’. But you have mentioned
some limitation.
Title: Determinants of Breast Self-Examination practice among women attending pastoralist
health facilities, southern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 25 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
-I have received the following documents; 1) point-by-point response, 2) revised manuscript
Eskinder, 3) Manuscript with Track change, 4) Figure Eskinder, and 5) Table Eskinder.
-I have not seen the clean version of the manuscript. 2) revised manuscript Eskinder is still under
track change. So, I can't confirm whether all the comments have been incorporated or not.
-I have seen the point-by-point response, seems well addressed still, I need a clean version of
the manuscript to check the work done.
-Describe your figure well (you should follow the journal figure and table guidelines. )
-No need to submit the table separately
- The authors must submit the clean version
Title: Determinants of Breast Self-Examination practice among women attending pastoralist
health facilities, southern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 28 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
I still have a question about BSE practice.  I read references 3 and 5, as you mentioned in the
operational definition.  The references do not explain BSE practice at all. The references discuss
disease epidemiology.  Therefore,  BSE practice should not have to be defined at least once
in the past twelve months.  I did not see any literature supporting your operational definition.
recommend the manuscript acceptance with English language revision.  The definition should be
ever performed by BSE in the last one month despite the access and the awareness of that specific
community.  As far as I know, there is no separate guideline for BSE practice for different
population segments.
Title: VOICES OF WOMEN IN HOMELESSNESS DURING THE OUTBREAK OF THE
COVID-19 PANDEMIC: A CO-CREATED QUALITATIVE STUDY
Version: 2 Date: 14 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript, entitled " VOICES OF WOMEN IN HOMELESSNESS DURING THE
OUTBREAK OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: A CO-CREATED QUALITATIVE STUDY",
presents a contemporary theme, with a necessary debate, and also presents originality. The
proposal may encourage further reflections on the subject.
The text presents excellent reflections about the difficulties experienced by women that live
street situation (homelessness) and comprehend the intensifying of it in the context of the
Covid-19 pandemic, whether this is perceived or not by the main players in the field studied. The
content of the article is included in the themes contemplated by the journal. The work contributes
to the scientific development of studies and research for the social and human sciences. The
article is original and presents a relevant approach to the increasingly acute expression of the
social question.
The objectives of the article were explained and the authors were able to fulfill them by bringing
an interesting dialogue, based on recent literature.
The article presents good theoretical foundation on the chosen theme, addressing the theme in
an original way and will certainly contribute to the production of knowledge and new reflections
about the challenges related to the street situation (homelessness) and, particularly, about women
who experience this situation.
The methodological path was appropriate to the object of study chosen and demonstrated
coherence with the content of the article presented. The final considerations are clear and
objective and well articulated relevant for new and necessary reflections on the theme. This
particular question deserves emphasis:
There is a saying from the National Movement of the Homeless People in Brazil that stands:
“Don´t talk about us without us”. The methodology selected by the authors when producing this
study reminds me of it since the process was not built for or about those women, but with them.
I must, thus, compliment the authors for the methodological decision. The research, even with
a small group of participants brought significant results. Therefore, I saw no prejudice on the
size of the sample, justified correctly by the authors. I suggest, however, that the place where
the research was carried out is included in the method [34-35], so that locality is clear since
there are relevant distinctions regarding homelessness depending on the locus of experience and,
consequently, of analysis. A final grammatical revision would also be relevant so that there is
no prejudice in this matter.
Title: VOICES OF WOMEN IN HOMELESSNESS DURING THE OUTBREAK OF THE
COVID-19 PANDEMIC: A CO-CREATED QUALITATIVE STUDY
Version: 4 Date: 02 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
The text presents fruitful reflections about homeless women and the content of the article is
included in the themes contemplated by the journal. The work contributes to the scientific
development of studies and research for contemporary social sciences on the subject. The article
is original and presents a relevant approach to this acute and contemporary expression of the
social issue.
The objectives of the article were explained and the author (a) was able to fulfill them by
explaining the theme in the light of dialogues with contemporary authors. The text presents a
good theoretical foundation for the chosen theme.
The arguments used are pertinent and the text originally addresses the theme and will certainly
contribute to the production of knowledge and new reflections about the challenges related to
the surviving experience of homeless women.
The methodological path was appropriate to the chosen object of study and demonstrated
coherence with the article’s content. The final considerations are clear, objective, well-
articulated, and relevant for new and necessary reflections on the theme.
Title: Trajectories of quality of life in breast cancer survivors during the first year after treatment:
a longitudinal study
Version: 0 Date: 03 Aug 2022
Reviewer:  Tania Islam
Reviewer's report:
Comments as a Reviewer
This paper examines the Trajectories of quality of life in breast cancer survivors during the
first year after treatment.. It covers an important topic and represents a significant amount of
work done by the authors. The rationale for the paper is outlined and important. The study is
interesting in implementing the interventions for cancer patients
Revisions:
# It is  not a trial so no need to register.
# Need English proofreading thoroughly.
# Cannot say longitudinal survey in the Method section (line 113).
# Add more details about trajectory model and why you choose it
# Normality of the data was checked or not? need to add in the analysis part
# Need to discuss about perceived economic status which is also statistically significant. I think
this part is overlooked. Need to discuss about total family income only perceived one does not
reflect it properly
# Cite reference for using OR of 2 (from previous study) to calculate the sample size (line 126)
# Table 2 need to discuss more in details.
Title: Kisspeptin regulates the proliferation and apoptosis of ovary granulosa cells in polycystic
ovary syndrome by modulating the PI3K/AKT/ERK signalling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 07 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript, which falls within the aim of this Journal. In my honest
opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. Nevertheless, authors
should clarify some points and improve the discussion, as suggested below.
Authors should consider the following recommendations:
- Manuscript should be further revised in order to correct some typos and improve style.
- I recommend to add further details to discuss, at least briefly, the role of kisspeptin in both
PCOS and precocious puberty (authors may refer to: PMID: 31584133; PMID: 33887744).
- I suggest  to highlight novel pieces of evidence about the regulation of PI3K/AKT/ERK
signaling pathway mediated by inositols (authors may refer to: PMID: 35472446; PMID:
34638926).
Title: Kisspeptin regulates the proliferation and apoptosis of ovary granulosa cells in polycystic
ovary syndrome by modulating the PI3K/AKT/ERK signalling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 29 Sep 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript provides valuable insights into the role of kisspeptin in PCOS.
However, language of the manuscript can be improved. In certain sections, it has been written
in present tense. Improvise the language of the manuscript.
I recommend the manuscript for acceptance.
Title: Kisspeptin regulates the proliferation and apoptosis of ovary granulosa cells in polycystic
ovary syndrome by modulating the PI3K/AKT/ERK signalling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 31 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
This study indicated that Kisspeptin expression was significantly decreased in ovarian granulosa
cells of PCOS rats. Overexpression of Kisspeptin improved the proliferation and alleviated
apoptosis of ovarian granulosa cells, as well as decreased the ROS generation and oxidative
stress, through activating the PI3K/AKT and ERK signalling pathway. Overall, this study was
of great significance and had a good scientific design.
1. Please cite the following articles in the background or discussion section.
(1) The Association Between Genetically Predicted Systemic Inflammatory Regulators and
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Mendelian Randomization Study.
(2) ETA-mediated anti-TNF-# therapy ameliorates the phenotype of PCOS model induced by
letrozole
2. In the method section, the primer for each gene used in qRT-PCR assay should be listed.
3. If possible, please repeat the experiment in Figure 1D.
4. Please display the scale bar in each picture more clearly, including HE, IHC, and IF pictures.
5. The discussion section was too short and need to be enriched. And please do not repeat the
same content as the background.
Title: Late initiation of Antenatal care among pregnant women in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia:
A facility based cross-sectional study
Version: 3 Date: 23 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
Title of the paper: - Late initiation of Antenatal care and associated factors among pregnant
women attending Antenatal care at public health centers in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia
Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript. Please see my comments as follow:
Review Comment
1 Title: - It's better if you add your study design and shorten your title
2 Abstract Part: - Please trim the background section and remove AOR and CI from the result
section of your abstract.
3 The whole document should be edited e.g., Abstract part line 36(there are repetitions),
background line 62(I think it's 2000(you written 200) ……... Please also ensure the English and
grammar of your paper (the whole document).
4 Keywords: Please use your keywords from MESH.
5 In the background section you are not specific (stick) to your title. Generally, you talked much
about ANC not about late initial. What is the advantage of early initiation or drawback of late
initiation and where is the gap?
6 Method Section: - if you add more information on
1. How many health centers were included in the study
2. Why 8 weeks of gestational age excluded from the study
3. You decide the gestational age based on LNMP and card review. What is card review means
(bimanual examination or U/S examination or what?) what presents in the card?
7 Table 1: what do authors mean about “others”, please explain who they are beneath the
table……. Please also edit your table accordingly (look at the BMC guideline).
Title: Late initiation of Antenatal care among pregnant women in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia:
A facility based cross-sectional study
Version: 3 Date: 06 Sep 2022
Reviewer's report:
Title: Late initiation of Antenatal care and associated factors among pregnant women attending
Antenatal care at public health centers in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia
Comments: Abstract
1. Language and writing styles
2. The conclusion should align with the findings
3. Keywords should not be a copy of the title
Background
1. It is not clear as early ANC reduced maternal mortality by-------
2. Citation of 200-2017 is not clear
3. Use current evidence (less than 5yrs)
4. No evidence for eight visits except recommendation
Methods
1. Study period and data collection need clarification
2. Inclusion criteria (what about 9-11wks of GA)
3. Why only health centers
4. You applied the tool (when you check after or before?
5. Sampling technique, reliability, and validity of the tool need more exploration
Results
1. Has to be specific towards your findings and objective
2. Avoid repetition of words and tables
3. P values should be identified in all cases
Discussion
1. That married and single need clarification with the evidence and consider the culture(context)
2. Should be in line with the findings(need to be refined) and with support of literature in the
background
3. The site of the study should be clear
Conclusion
1. Should focus on the findings/result
2. Use similar words you had identified in the results and discussion
Ethics approval and consent to participate
1. Include IRB Protocol number
2. Without Addis Ababa City, how you reach health centers?
3. Need clarification as highlighted
Author’s contribution
Seems gift authorship (PLEASE READ THE CRITERIA)
The study tool/questionnaire should be attached separately
Title: Late initiation of Antenatal care among pregnant women in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia:
A facility based cross-sectional study
Version: 6 Date: 05 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors, thank you for incorporating the given comments. Please address raised issues
below with regards.
1. Specify the year of study/data collection--December 25...in the abstract and methods
2. The questionnaire adapted from existing literature (22-27)--you took/adapted from 6
sources(how can you make it a valid tool?)
3. If you assigned data collectors and supervisors, what was your role as an author? Did you
include them as authorship?
4. Please don't report the p-value as 0.00
5. Ethical approval...please write yours, rather than copying the theory.
6. Better if you identify who was data collectors and supervisors are.
Title: Establishment and validation of a simple nomogram for predicting early postpartum stress
urinary incontinence among women with vaginal delivery: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 30 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the submission. It is a relevant article and an interesting read although it has
methodological flaws as discussed in the article.
Please could you clarify:
1. Sentence 12 - What you mean by: Abnormal postpartum recovery (e.g., uncleaned lochia and
uterus subinvolution, etc.) and reason for exclusion?
2. Please clarify what you mean by training cohort and validation cohort?
3. What was the reason for choosing 2019 and 2022 as the years for participant selection?
4. It would be useful to have more information about the ICIQ in the results.
Title: Establishment and validation of a simple nomogram for predicting early postpartum stress
urinary incontinence among women with vaginal delivery: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 05 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations to the authors. The article Establishing and validating a simple nomogram for
predicting early postpartum stress urinary incontinence among women with vaginal delivery: A
retrospective study seems interesting and fits the profile of the journal. The described nomogram
for predicting the risk of SUI in women after vaginal delivery the study can be used in daily
clinical practice. The authors rightly point out the limitations of their study but I believe that the
use of the created nomogram in a prospective evaluation may provide new information on its
effectiveness. I recommend this manuscript for approval.
Title: Establishment and validation of a simple nomogram for predicting early postpartum stress
urinary incontinence among women with vaginal delivery: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 08 Dec 2022
Reviewer:  Tullio Golia D'auge
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled "Establishment and validation of a simple
nomogram for predicting early postpartum stress urinary incontinence among women with
vaginal delivery: A retrospective study".
In my opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. However, the
manuscript must be corrected in several points to make it eligible for publication.
-Typos errors must be corrected.
-Which groups are compared?  What is meant by training cohort and validation cohort?
- Discussions can be expanded and improved by citing relevant articles (I suggest authors to
read and insert in references the following article PMID: 32744453; 33103408).
Considered all this 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.