JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG): A mixed method study
Version: 0 Date: 08 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
The article describes a rigorous method used to develop and validate a referral tool for pregnant
women telephoning with signs of obstetric complications.
The mixed inductive and deductive approach used to identify the reasons for the calls enabled a
rigorous inventory of clinical situations to be made.  This guideline was assessed by experts, and
provides a uniform basis for assessing the severity of symptoms and the urgency of receiving
obstetric services for relevant triage personnel.
The article is well written and the discussion is well conducted. The revisions I suggest are
therefore minor.
With regard to the authors' affiliations, consider specifying the professions or status of authors
1 and 4, as is the case for authors 2 and 3.
Line 99: please correct "the subj.ects "
Line 106-107: Please consider indicating the average duration of interviews and the maximum
and minimum durations rather than the total duration.
Line 111: I suggest referring to a review of the literature, as you do on line 156.
Lines 165 to 167: Can you give a little more detail on the validity scores obtained?
Line 178: Consider to replace America by United States of America
To flesh out the conclusion, you could give some clinical perspectives, or explain to what extent
this tool has been implemented, or not yet and why.
In the figure 2:
It's Tetanic uterus and not titanic one
Remember to capitalise each bullet point.
Title: The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG): A mixed method study
Version: 0 Date: 21 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
The authors present a study using an exploratory sequential mixed method approach in two
qualitative and quantitative stages relating an interesting midwifery topic: obstetric telephone
triage. Unfortunately, I felt that  there are methodological aspects that should be better explained.
The most critical aspect is not having considered the point of view of women and couples in
the elaboration of the guideline. The user's perspective is a crucial factor that should not be
neglected. The authors should clarify the reason for this decision.
Introduction/background should begin with a clear description of the problem the study was
designed to
address and then systematically review the relevant research literature to build the case for the
need for
this study. Authors have described the impact of a well-structured obstetric triage on the quality
of health services without considered the clients point of view. In the literature there are many
studies describing women expectation regarding the obstetric triage. This theme should be added
to support the rationale of the study.
In the methods section, in the qualitative stage, the purposive sample method adoptive,  needs to
be clarified and the exclusion criteria seem vague. Which healthcare professional were enrolled?
Please add reference to the chosen method and to other "part of a large study".
To ensure reproducibility of the study, authors should clarify the criteria used to identify the
10 faculty members.
In the results section, the findings related to qualitative analysis should be better described.
Title: The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG): A mixed method study
Version: 2 Date: 04 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank the authors for this manuscript, which responds well to the requests we
made.
In my opinion, the only thing that needs to be reworded is the sequence between the results of
the qualitative interviews and the literature review, at the end of this paragraph.
After that, the manuscript seems clear to me and I would recommend its publication.
Title: The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG): A mixed method study
Version: 2 Date: 26 Feb 2024
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?
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?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Overall the authors have responded well to the reviewers’ comments
except in a couple of instances. Greater detail has been provided on methods and overall the
English expression is satisfactory although additional minor improvement is desirable.  An
added table needs minor revision and some additional detail is required about the existing
service.  The authors’ response to Reviewer 1 was truncated in the material I received. The final
sentence reads “ The obstetric telephone….developed for the first time in”
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Reviewer 1 had asked for details on use of telephone triage in the hospitals from which
participants were drawn ( lines 106-113). The annual/monthly call volume has not been
presented.
Reviewer 2 asked for details on the validity scores. These are presented in Table 2 and repeated
in the text. The latter is not needed ( a single sentence would do) if the table would be better
presented. The table should be self explanatory I.e. the contents should be clear from the title
and the column headings the reader should see that this represents the % agreement with the
domains in the AGREE instrument by 10 experts. In addition the text should be clear that this
is an assessment of content validity alone.
The authors have not responded adequately to reviewer 3’s critique that the patients’ voices
have not been accessed in assessing the tool. This response does not need to be extensive - one
sentence in the methods and a brief mention in the discussion. If there is no culturally appropriate
research on the use of telephone triage guidelines then say so.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
I would change the title to “ The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG):
A mixed method study”"
Title: The design of an Obstetric Telephone Triage Guideline (OTTG): A mixed method study
Version: 3 Date: 01 Apr 2024
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: The authors have responded adequately to each of the issues raised
in the comments and have made appropriate changes to the manuscript. The revised manuscript
is acceptable.
Title: Interstitial round needles should not be used for cervical cancer patient treated with
intracavitary/ interstitial brachytherapy using a Venezia applicator : a case report
Version: 1 Date: 02 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript, which falls within the aim of this Journal and offers
a high-quality overview of the topic.
The abstract satisfactorily summarizes the contents of the manuscript.  The figures are clear and
interesting.
Although the manuscript can be considered already of high quality, I would suggest taking into
account the following minor recommendations:
- I suggest another round of language revision, to correct a few typos and improve readability.
- I find it interesting to include a reference to the new treatment strategies currently in use for
the treatment of cervical cancer (see PMID: 38159033).
-What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? It is
important to report the results obtained by the authors in the context of clinical practice and to
adequately highlight what contribution  this study adds to the literature already existing on the
topic and to future study perspectives.
- Discussions can be expanded and improved by citing relevant articles about the reactive oxygen
species and the development of cervical lesions (I suggest authors to read and insert in references
the following article PMID: 37873540).
Title: Interstitial round needles should not be used for cervical cancer patient treated with
intracavitary/ interstitial brachytherapy using a Venezia applicator : a case report
Version: 1 Date: 04 Apr 2024
Reviewer:  Vittorio Agrifoglio
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled “Interstitial round needle should not be used
for cervical cancer patient treated with intracavitary/ interstitial brachytherapy using a Venezia
applicator : a case report”, which falls within the aim of this Journal.
In my honest opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention.
Methodology is accurate and conclusions are supported by the data analysis . Nevertheless,
authors should clarify some point and improve the discussion citing relevant and novel key
articles about the topic.
Authors should consider the following recommendations:
- Manuscript should be further revised by a native English speaker
-      It is possible that oxidative stress within the vaginal space may increase the risk that
metaplastic cervical epithelium, caused by HPV infection, progresses to CIN and overt cervical
cancer. I would briefly discuss this point, referring to: PMID: 37873540
Title: Relationship between Abnormal Pelvic Floor Electromyography and Obstetric Factors in
Postpartum Women: A Cross-sectional Study
Version: 0 Date: 19 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
First of all, congratulations to the researchers for their contributions to improving women's
health.
As described in the study, pelvic floor dysfunctions during pregnancy and postpartum have a
significant impact on women's quality of life both postpartum and in later life.
This study highlights the need to promote the health of the pelvic musculature, as well as to
prevent and treat possible injuries to it.
With reference to the study in question, the sample size is one of the strong points, although the
following recommendations are proposed:
- Describe in the summary the number of participating women (sample size).
- Detail the number of potentially eligible participants, of whom have or have not met the
inclusion/exclusion criteria and how many of them have or have not completed the follow-up.
- It would be advisable to present a flow chart of this process.
- If any participants have been lost, the reasons should be given.
Among the weak points or points that need to be improved, the following should be highlighted:
1. Variables:
- "Relevant sociological and obstetric factors including newborn birth weight, antenatal BMI of
the puerperas, absolute value of BMI rise during pregnancy, delivery modes, duration of labor,
etc. were collected at 6-8 weeks postpartum". It would be useful to describe all the variables
(avoid using etc and specify all the variables that have been explored).
- Is it determined whether a distinction is made between women who have had spontaneous
and instrumental delivery, or only between delivery and caesarean section? Since according to
the variable normal delivery it is not clear to me whether only spontaneous deliveries or also
instrumental deliveries are included.
2. Results and descriptive data:
- It would be interesting to present a more detailed participant description of all those sociological
and obstetric variables mentioned in the methodology section and supposedly assessed (maternal
BMI, newborn birth weight, duration of labour, among others).
- It would be advisable to include confidence intervals for the numerical results provided.
3. Limitations:
- It may incur a limitation if in the concept of vaginal delivery if instrumented deliveries are
also included.
4. Generalisability of the results
- Given that protocols during the second stage of labour may vary from country to country,
consideration should be given to this fact when generalising the results of this study.
After analysis of the data presented in this article, it is recommended that the article be accepted
for publication, provided that the recommended modifications are taken into account and made.
Title: Relationship between Abnormal Pelvic Floor Electromyography and Obstetric Factors in
Postpartum Women: A Cross-sectional Study
Version: 0 Date: 21 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
The article is relevant, has important information, but needs minor adjustments. Rewrite the
objectives, adjust the acronyms and adjust some words.
Replace the word puerperas: postpartum women
Pont out that they are primiparous
Vaginal birth instead of normal labour
Use the acronym PFM, sEMG
Objective: To evaluate the surface electromyography (sEMG) of pelvic floor muscle (PFM),
compare between vaginal birth and cesarean section and correlate with maternity and obstetrics
characteristics in primiparous 6–8 weeks postpartum.
Standandize PFMs along the text
And approval number  of Medical Ethics Committee?
Results:
A total of 543 patients, including 223 cesarean section and 320 vaginal bith primiparous
postpartum women were enrolled in this study.
Standardize vaginal birth, postpartum women
The authors thought about correlation with BMI instead of height?
Title: Relationship between Abnormal Pelvic Floor Electromyography and Obstetric Factors in
Postpartum Women: A Cross-sectional Study
Version: 1 Date: 02 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations for the work done and for considering the comments to improve the research
and its contribution to improving women's health.
The comments:
1. Flowchart: it would be useful to indicate in Figure 1Y the number of participants at each stage,
although this has already been described in the text.
Title: Interferon-gamma-induced GBP1 is an inhibitor of human papillomavirus 18
Version: 1 Date: 25 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript by Xu et al. concludes that IFN-gamma induced GBP1 (a IFN inducible GTPase
that can restrict toxoplasma infection) blocks HPV18 via degradation of ther viral E6 protein.
This conclusion is premature and was based only ectopic expression of E6 and GBP1 ORFs in
293T cells. No work was done on actual HPV18 infected cells (aside from HeLa cells in Fig 1).
Overall the work is not of sufficient rigor to support the conclusions.
Major Problems:
1. The first line of the introduction: "Human papillomavirus (HPV) belongs to Group A of the
lactopolyviridae family, a group of small, non-enveloped double-stranded DNA viruses that live
in epithelial tissue" is false. There is no such taxonomy.
2. human interferon alpha-2b is used clinically for treatment of viral hepatitis and certain cancers,
not used widespread in treatment of HPV-associated diseases as stated in the introduction: "At
present, the main clinical use of recombinant human interferon to treat HPV infection, but the
therapeutic effect is limited"
3. The HeLa cell data in figure 1- what antibody is detecting HPV18 E1, E2, and E6 protreins?
The data makes no sense because HeLa cells only express the HPV18 E6 and E7 proteins, not
E1 and E2. The reported decrease in E6 is not convincing. If GBP1 is degrading E6 then there
should be a rescue of p53 protein levels in these HeLa cells, this was not shown.
4. The data in Figure 2 are unconvincing. First, is the fusion protein E6-RFP? Fusion of RFP
to the C-terminus of HPV18 E6 will block the PDZ ligand at the extreme C-terminus of E6.
This would perturb E6's natural functions and confound data interpretation. Second, the subtle
decrease is not convincing. This could be due to the cotransfection itself, with a second plasmid
containing promoter and expression elements. Third, pUC57 isn't even an expression vector (see
below), this shouldn't even work.
5. The data in Figure 4 are unconvincing. There is no description of how the quantitative
fluorescence data in 4A were normalized for cell number. The decrease in signal could be due
to simply less cells present in the well. At a minimum more western blots and quantification by
densitometry needs to be done to conclude significant GBP1 degradation.
6. Overall the paper is not of sufficient quality and rigor to support the conclusions made.
More work with actual IFN-gamma dependent GBP1 expression in more relevant cell culture
models (HPV18 immortalized cells, not just cotransfected 293 cells or HeLa cells) looking at
the endogenous levels of E6 would be more appropriate. There are many problems with proper
English  grammar and syntax throughout the paper, and a few completely false statements.
minor:
1. pUC57 is a bacterial cloning vector, it lacks mammalian promoter and transcription elements.
It is unclear how GBP1 could be expressed in mammalian cell culture with the pUC57-GBP1-
EGFP vector.
2. The labeling in Figure 4 is confusing, please label the lanes in a more clear manner.
Title: Prenatal Diagnosis of 18p Deletion and 8p Trisomy Syndrome: Literature Review and
Report of a Novel Case
Version: 2 Date: 02 Jan 2024
Reviewer:  Luis A. Méndez-Rosado
Reviewer's report:
Manuscript review:Prenatal Diagnosis of 18p Deletion and 8p Trisomy Syndrome: A Clinical
Report and Review of Literature. ID d6175435-fe61-46b7-b0c1-c99cb9676db3
It is an interesting publication that contributes to a better clinical delineation of patients with
these types of chromosomal aberrations.
However, there are some aspects that the authors should correct or clarify. I will relate them
according to the different parts of this work.
Highlights
- Upon the appearance of a chromosomal rearrangement of this type, it is essential to perform a
chromosomal study of both parents in order to provide correct genetic counseling. This has not
yet been included. Introdution-background
- The expression "this combination of DNA mutations" should be changed to "chromosomal
rearrangement" to gain precision in the description of the phenomenon that has occurred....
Results
- The description of the karyotype according to ISCN 2021 must appear in the work, it is very
important to specify the breakpoints on chromosome 8 and 18.
Discussion and Review of the literature
- - The expression low-penetrance phenotypes is not the most correct one, it should be referred
to as reduced penetrance or incomplete penetrance.
- - The expression due to LCRs (Ligase Chain Reactions) is completely incorrect. Low copy
repeats (LCRs) are heavily involved in recurrent rearrangements.
- - The expression "clinical image different from any patient" is not correct and should be
replaced by "responsible for the different phenotype of the patient".
- “Mosaics make up the majority of trisomy 8 patients. As a result, whereas full trisomy 8 makes
up 12% of the autosomal trisomies discovered in spontaneous miscarriages, it is a rare defect in
postnatal life.”  Why do the authors talk about this in their publication, which only deals with
8p duplication?
- “Specifically, the 8p23.3p22 region contains 81 proteins that code genes.” This expression
needs to be corrected.
- - The conclusions do not take into account the importance of the study of the progenitors in
these cases in order to offer a correct genetic counseling at the end.
- - In the table, some acronyms have not been declared.
Title: Prenatal Diagnosis of 18p Deletion and 8p Trisomy Syndrome: Literature Review and
Report of a Novel Case
Version: 2 Date: 06 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I read your article titled "Prenatal Diagnosis of 18p Deletion and 8p Trisomy Syndrome: Case
Report and Review of Literature".
I found it written well and comprehensively.
The biggest value of this article is that it adds another piece of genotype-phenotype evidence
that is importance in everyday diagnostic life. In my opinion, every case counts and sharing it
with wider community is crucial for better understanding how certain genetic changes translate
into clinical presentation, that is very often limited in prenatal setting.
In my opinion this article meets requirements for publications and should be accepted for further
stages of the publishing process.
Title: Prenatal Diagnosis of 18p Deletion and 8p Trisomy Syndrome: Literature Review and
Report of a Novel Case
Version: 2 Date: 09 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
In this paper, the authors reported the first prenatal case of the association of 18p Deletion and
8p Trisomy Syndrome and reviewed these two syndromes. The paper is interesting, but I have
some concerns and suggestions for improvement:
1. First, this paper should be revised in terms of sentences, coherence, and use of English.
2. "In this paper, the authors reported the first prenatal case of the association of 18p Deletion
and 8p Trisomy Syndrome and reviewed these two syndromes. However, there are discrepancies
in the paper. For instance, the authors stated, "To our knowledge, this is the second prenatal
diagnosis of 8p trisomy syndrome," Table 1 presents at least four cases of prenatal diagnosis
with 8p duplication. Additionally, in the abstract and introduction sections, they reported, "This
is the first case where this combination of DNA mutations has been described prenatally and
the second case in general. However, in the results section, they mentioned, "In the current
literature, there is no report of the existence of both findings in one patient". These points should
be clarified.
3. There are many typos in the manuscript such as "holoprosengephaly", which should be
replaced by "holoprosencephaly".
4. When introducing abbreviations in the manuscript, they should be spelled out completely
on their first appearance and followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. For example,
for holoprosencephaly, the correct abbreviation is HPE. The abbreviation should be used
consistently throughout the manuscript.
5. In the results section, it is recommended to specify the version of the human genome (hg) used
to ensure precision. The human genome reference builds are constantly evolving, and different
versions may have variations in sequences and naming conventions. Therefore, it is important
to specify the version used to ensure reproducibility and accuracy of the results.
6. In the discussion section, it is recommended to correct the abbreviation "LCRs (Ligase
Chain Reactions)" to "LCRs (Low Copy Repeats)." LCRs are genomic regions that are highly
similar and can lead to genomic instability and copy number variations. They are often involved
in chromosomal rearrangements and can cause genetic diseases such as Williams-Beuren
syndrome.  Therefore, it is important to use the correct abbreviation to ensure precision and
clarity in the manuscript.
7. In the manuscript, the term "mental retardation"should be replaced by the term "intellectual
disability"throughout the text. The use of the term "intellectual disability"is more appropriate
and respectful, and it reflects the current understanding of the condition.