Title: Utilization of sexual and reproductive health services among construction worker women
in southern Ethiopia
Version: 1 Date: 25 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
To: BMC Women’s Health
Title: Sexual and Reproductive health service utilization and associated factors among daily
worker women at Sodo town construction site, Wolaita, southern Ethiopia: a community-based
cross-sectional study
First thank you very much for inviting to review such a kind of manuscripts which has a positive
impact on reproductive health service utilization and coverage that improve overall quality of
life. Here is my insight in each section of the paper.
Title: why you select only daily workers working at construction site?
Abstract:
Line 13-14 Even though, there are inequalities in the utilization of SRH services among
residents, educational levels, and socioeconomic classes. What do you want to say? It doesn’t
has full meaning, has grammatical error.
Line 26 starting from married woman was is not clear and scientifically sound pleas avoid the
word was.
Line 27 who living with husbands, friends, and boyfriends were--- please try to put separately.
Here what is the difference between married and live with husband?
Line 33. Abbreviations are not recommended in abstract.
Line 34: harassment of women is common practice. Conclusion should be in line with your
result.
Introduction
Line 41 --- infirmities, though. What you want to say???
Line 42-43 The all-inclusive package of sexual and reproductive health and rights addresses
people's service needs throughout their reproductive lives. This sentence is not clear so, please
rephrase again.
Line 45-46 Unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions increased as a result of unequal access
to sexual and reproductive health care. Are you sure this is due to unequal access? But it is due
to total absence of the service. What percent of the marginalized segment of population affected
due to unequal access?
Line 47-51 needs sensitization and rephrasing
Line 53-59 takes about GBV which is a very huge concept and not part of your research question
so better to remove it.
Line 73-75 if the factors are known what is the importance of your research?
General comment on introduction
-lacks consistency and logical flow
-lacks of punctuation mark
Method
Line 89-91 what is the importance listing hospitals and health centers? It is not institutional
setting study. Better if you list number of constrictions in the town.
Line 99 are you using similar population when calculating the sample size?
Line 159 what are the components of SRH in this study?
Line 160  ------ within the previous year . if a woman you SRH before she become daily laborer
how did you consider this mother?
Result
-it has language and error. Punctuation mark and patterns of grammar flow.
Discussion
Generally the discussion is very shallow, has logical flow problem, and discuss unethically with
different study populations. Discussing with different population other than the study population
leads to false generalization
Line 278  the attempting of putting justification with different study population is totally
unacceptable. In the reference 14 the population was not daily laborers.
- Almost all discussions have similar problems