JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Reviewer's report
Title:Natural history of ovarian endometrioma in pregnancy
Version:3Date:29 May 2014
Reviewer: Ludovico Muzii
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting case series of patients diagnosed with ovarian
endometrioma during pregnancy and followed during pregnancy.
There is paucity of data on this topic. The manuscript therefore deserves
attention.
Minor essential revision:
on line 209, "Mirena coli" should be replaced by the generic name
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
No conflict of interest
Reviewer's report
Title:Natural history of ovarian endometrioma in pregnancy
Version:3Date:10 June 2014
Reviewer: Mary Ellen Pavone
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Page 5: Were the women diagnosed with endometriosis prior to pregnancies
surgically diagnosed?
Page 7: Authors should speculate why endometriomas do not decidualize with
medical treatments (i.e. pills etc)
Page 7: The authors discuss laparotomy vs laparscopic treatment of
appendectomy and try to draw conclusions as to what would occur in women
with endometriosis. I think it is important for the authors to discuss the presence
of infection in the case of an appendectomy--this is not the case with most
endometriomas, and it is likely the infection, and not the surgical intervention,
that led to adverse outcomes
Page 8: Authors mention recurrence rate after pregnancy. This is not the correct
term, since this implies that the condition resolved and then re-appeared, which
is likely not what happens to endometriomas.
Minor Essential Revisions
Authors should include" Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999 Aug;66(2):137-41.
Preoperative ultrasound assessment of adnexal masses in premenopausal
women.
Milad MP1, Cohen L." in their references
Discretionary Revisions
Last sentence on page 7 requires a "." after appendectomy.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
none
Reviewer's report
Title:Interventions to reduce postpartum stress in first-time mothers: A
Randomized-Controlled Trial
Version:2Date:7 June 2014
Reviewer: Karen Ertel
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting trial on an important topic.
Comments:
1. Please provide a more thorough discussion and explanation of the PSS-10,
including its use in the postpartum.
2. Response bias due to social desireability on the part of the mothers seems like
a real threat in this study, but it was not mentioned. Related, what did the
mothers know about the aims of the study?
3. The authors note that the assessors may have known the subject's
intervention allocation. Please discuss in further detail.
4. Is there a way to put the approx 3-point difference in context? It would be
particularly useful if it could be put into the context of predicting depression. If
that is not possible, perhaps compare based on sociodemographic differences,
or any other relevant characteristics or interventions (previously published) that
show an approx 3-point difference?
5. Page 10, lines 9 & 18-19 refer to differences that were not statistically
significant. Please be clear that these were not stat sig.
6. Table 1 - what are the numbers in parenths?
7. Table 3 - what are the numbers in parenths? Please indicate that numbers are
%.
8. Table 4 - ditto
9. Figure needs title, y-axis description, a description or key, and the lines need
to be larger for comprehension.
Minor questions/comments:
10. The sample is from women delivering in hospitals. Is that the norm in Beirut?
What % of deliveries occur in hospitals?
11. Pg 5, line 8, the parenthetical phrase seems like a note to a co-author.
Perhaps revise or rephrase.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
i declare that i have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Interventions to reduce postpartum stress in first-time mothers: A
Randomized-Controlled Trial
Version:3Date:30 July 2014
Reviewer: Zoltan Kozinszky
Reviewer's report:
as attached
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
no
Reviewer's report
Title:Contraceptive use and Unmet need for Family Planning among HIV
Positive Women on Antiretroviral Therapy in Kumasi, Ghana
Version:1Date:19 April 2014
Reviewer: oskari heikinheimo
Reviewer's report:
The authors have examined the patterns of contraceptive use among female
attendees of an antiretroviral therapy clinic in Kumasi Ghana. The authors find
that less than half of the couples were using contraception, the use of modern
contraceptive methods is rare and that there is a high unmet need of
contraceptive services. Even though the results come as no surprise, I applaud
the authors for their efforts in studying a very important local & national issue.
Although the data is of interest, the study is a descriptive one, the population
studied (n=230) comes from a single clinic and represents only a small fraction of
all HIV-infected fertile aged women in Ghana (total nro of HIV-infected individuals
approx. 270.000). I therefore think that the paper would be better suited for a
national / local journal.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Contraceptive use and Unmet need for Family Planning among HIV
Positive Women on Antiretroviral Therapy in Kumasi, Ghana
Version:2Date:8 July 2014
Reviewer: Frank Kaharuza
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for providing a detailed response and review article
Clearly there has been a significant improvement in the presentation of the
results and in the manuscript in general
However, I am still concerned about some of the analyses presented
It would have been desirable to have the analysis stratified for some of the
factors that may be associated with the desire for children and contraceptive use
If I desire for children, I am unlikely to use a method.
The sample sizes for this study is small for a comparative analysis of this nature-
that is why the results have high confidence intervals and potentially are not
significant
In the response you mentioned logistic regression- this has not been described in
the methods in the manuscript yet the table was included- please include. And
since you can do logistic regression could you consider it to provide adjusted odd
ratios or some other method of stratification so we can get adjusted odds ratios-
you could adjust for age and education
Please review you numbers carefully Current sexual partners (N= 125). Partners
desire (N=143) do some have partners who are not current sexual partners
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Contraceptive use and Unmet need for Family Planning among HIV
Positive Women on Antiretroviral Therapy in Kumasi, Ghana
Version:2Date:16 July 2014
Reviewer: Fredrick Makumbi
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer's report: Major and compulsory
Many of the previous issues are still scanty, and received minimal of no good
attention, especially the statistical analysis plan section
1:The statistical analysis methods are very scanty, yet these clearly inform the
results
2:The data presentation is very weak and need significant improvement
3:Many of the responses seem not to have had clear attention.
4:The authors need an English and scientific writing editor if you are to have this
as an acceptable quality manuscript for the readers
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Are single mothers' higher smoking rates mediated by dysfunctional coping
styles?
Version:1Date:19 March 2014
Reviewer: Ari Haukkala
Reviewer's report:
This is interesting study that addresses relevant public health problem, high
prevalence of smoking among single mothers. This area is less examined and
will have important public health impact in case there could be some information
to improve this problem. However, in regards to manuscript there are many short
comings that diminish the quality of paper in its current form.
Major compulsory revisions
1. A first major issue that has to be resolved is one of the coping styles
“substance consumption” that includes specific questions about smoking.
Naturally smokers have higher prevalence of this coping style although items
include other substances as well. It became quite trivial to examine does this
coping style mediate association between single motherhood and smoking. This
coping dimension could be analyzed separately from other more psychological
coping styles.
2. Second major limitation is the association between smoking and stress.
Introduction does not include any information how stress is related to smoking.
There are several important dimensions/mechanism in this association. Authors
must address and describe which dimension/mechanism is related to current
paper.
3. in Table 1 coping styles are presented as continuous variables comparing
mean values between single mothers and other mothers. However, in table 2
these coping styles are presented as categorical tertiles. This is unnecessary as
continuous variables can be used logistic regression as predictors for smoking
status.
There were several minor issues
5. in the methods section authors describe smoking prevalence and after that
how smoking prevalence was measured.
6. For table 1 it is unnecessary to show item level information within coping styles
five coping styles. Instead in the methods section there must be some
information what kind of reliability these sum variables (coping styles) have in
terms of Cronbach alpha or equivalent reliability indicator.
7. in the abstract there is now clear results in terms of p-values or odds ratios.
8. In the results section it is more appropriate to indicate table where results are
(in this case mean values) are presented and use p-values in the text to indicate
significance.
9. According to this logic non-significant results (page 7 first paragraph) are
non-significant, means do not “tend” to be higher.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Reviewer's report
Title:Are single mothers' higher smoking rates mediated by dysfunctional coping
styles?
Version:1Date:5 June 2014
Reviewer: Anna Pease
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting and well-written paper reporting on the results of a
cross-sectional survey looking at smoking in single and partnered mothers and
their associated coping styles. The paper adds to the body of evidence that
single mothers are more likely to smoke and brings to light some interesting
associations between their smoking habits and coping strategies. There are
some discretionary revisions that may make this paper more readable and clarify
more accurately the study that has taken place:
1. It is clearly acknowledged in the limitations of the study that firm conclusions
about the causal relationship between smoking and coping cannot be drawn as
the study is cross-sectional. However, an assumption that single mothers ways of
coping predict smoking behaviour was necessary to complete the analysis. It
may be beneficial then to change some of the language in the abstract of the
paper to reflect this limitation, for example, instead of the "causal links" they
could write "associations between". Again, i would change "Moreover, single
motherhood turned out to moderate the..." to "Our results indicate that single
motherhood may moderate the..."
2. Background: I would reword the sentence "By contrast, Avison et al. could not
find any evidence that..." to "In contrast, Avison et al. found that single mothers
did not react differently to stressors, and were not more vulnerable to them."
3. Methods: From the section that begins "The percentage of single mothers who
smoked" to the end, should be included in the "Smoking prevalence" section
rather than in the Sample section.
4. Smoking prevalence: Reword "If the women answered "smoking daily", it was
asked" to "If the women answered "smoking daily", they were asked"
5. Question the conclusion in the discussion that a higher score on substance
consumption meant a mother was more likely to smoke - it could also be that
smoking leads to higher scores on that scale since it includes smoking as a
coping mechanism. This was not a surprising finding and I am curious as to why
the authors found it so interesting.
Overall the paper is interesting and if published will likely lead to some debate
about how best to support single mothers who smoke to become smokefree
while acknowledging that they may need extra support to deal with the stress
they experience.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Are single mothers' higher smoking rates mediated by dysfunctional coping
styles?
Version:4Date:5 September 2014
Reviewer: Ari Haukkala
Reviewer's report:
Authors have respond for all remarks that I have made.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
None
Reviewer's report
Title:Impact of Endometriosis on Women's Lives: a Qualitative Study
Version:2Date:19 June 2014
Reviewer: Jean Gilmour
Reviewer's report:
This qualitative research study has collected data from a substantial group of
women with endometriosis. The findings in general reiterate findings from other
qualitative studies so confirm rather than expand current research evidence.
However, the persistence of diagnostic delay is worth noting once again to inform
improvements in best practice and heighten professional vigilance. The study
design focused on 3 distinct age groups is an original aspect of the study, the
findings indicate impacts that are highlighted at different life stages.
Major compulsory revisions
1. More detail about methodology
2. More detail on the recruitment process –how were the women contacted?
3. Include more information about the focus group questions used to guide the
group interview
4. Section on impact of life style extended finishing with interpretation rather than
a quote
5. The discussion needs more work –in general there appear to be research
findings that are mentioned for the first time in the discussion section ie labelled
as having an STD (p 23, 520). Please review the discussion and make sure the
all points made have been reported previously in your findings section.
6. What are the limitations of the research?
7. What are your recommendations for further research?
Minor essential revisions
1. In the section of demographic characteristics use actual counts rather than
percentages as low numbers.
2. P 21 L 468 Too much information here-could identify participant –perhaps
leave out the actual sport.
3. P 23 l 521 –add “in the literature” as otherwise could be confused with your
findings in the preceding sentence
4. There are grammatical corrections that need to be made so a careful editing is
in order
5. Examples P 11 L248 “Other two”; Sentence construction p 12 L252-252; P 15
sentence commencing 334 needs rewriting- too long and not clear. There are
other long sentences that could be split to improve readability
Discretionary revisions
1. P 12 L 257 Do you want to quantify as you done with “Twice as often” –jars
with qualitative style of reporting. Did you count responses? Morphing into
quantitative content analysis.
2. Useful process having group participants confirming accuracy of
transcripts-could be part of rigour paragraph.
3. I would refer to NVivo software in the abstract and data analysis section as
being used to organise the data (currently infers that the software is used to
analyse data).I don’t agree that using NVivo necessary adds to the rigour of the
study, more to the convenience of data analysis but all the processes mentioned
can be carried out without this software.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Impact of Endometriosis on Women's Lives: a Qualitative Study
Version:2Date:23 June 2014
Reviewer: Carlos Souza
Reviewer's report:
This is a very intersting article about impact of endometriosis on patient's quality
of life
Major Compulsory Revisions
some aspects of the paper are evaluated in a cursory manner, especially the
various dimensions of loss of quality of life of patients. It is worth special
consideration must be placed in relation to pain intensity and impact on quality of
life. It is known that endometriosis is a complex and several clinical forms, thus
patients with varying intensities of pain pathology may present different
perspectives on their quality of life.
The article does not show nenuyma novelty regarding the decrease in quality of
life of patients, the newest aspects affect the various possible dimensions of
change among patients and within the same patient. Thus, furthering the issues
related to pain and reduced quality of life should be placed.
1) Improve the discussion regarding the intensity of pain and possible
correlations with the reduction / change of quality of life
2) Explore aspects of sexual quality of life and pain intensity
Minor essecial revisions
3) Reduce multiple aspects evaluated, try to focus on less points.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Impact of Endometriosis on Women's Lives: a Qualitative Study
Version:4Date:25 August 2014
Reviewer: Carlos Souza
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer questions were answered and article is able to publication.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Impact of Endometriosis on Women's Lives: a Qualitative Study
Version:4Date:30 August 2014
Reviewer: Jean Gilmour
Reviewer's report:
- Major Compulsory Revisions
The major compulsory revisions have been addressed in the main in a very
comprehensive manner.
- Minor Essential Revisions
Suggestions have been addressed. A couple of errors picked up that need
correction- P.5 L 116 “Polit and Beck”; P. 9 L 198 remove italics in citation to be
consistent.
- Discretionary Revisions
Addressed
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Association between physical activity and menopausal symptoms in
perimenopausal women
Version:6Date:7 July 2014
Reviewer: Sun Ju Chang
Reviewer's report:
This paper reports a study that conducted to identify the associations between
physical activity and menopausal symptoms in perimenopausal women in Korea.
Although the topic is interesting, some parts of the manuscript need to be
revised.
1. Background: The author(s) stated that the impact of physical activity on
menopausal symptoms during the menopausal transition period is poorly
understood. However, I found some relevant papers by searching on Google,
Pubmed, and so on.
Please find and see the paper titled “Menopausal symptoms and physical activity
in multiethnic groups of midlife women: a secondary analsys-by Sun Ju Chang,
Wonshik Chee, & Eun-Ok Im” and its references. Then, the author(s) should
provide the uniqueness of this manuscript, compared with previous studies.
2. Methods: Is this a secondary data analysis? If yes, the author(s) should
provide more detailed information on the original study. If no, the author(s)
should provide more information on the study participants such as the sample
calculation methods used and inclusion criteria. Please provide the exact
definitions of the premenopause, perimenopause, postmenopause.
Regarding the measurement section, I wonder the person who measured the
variables including BMI, WC, and BP.
For ensuring the reliability of the instruments used in this study, the author(s)
provide the reliability coefficients such as Chronbach’s alpha with the
descriptions on the instruments.
3. Discussions: I recommend that the authors(s) need to discuss the results with
new related references, which are suggested above. Also, some parts of the
discussion seem to be not relevant the aims of the study (from 20 lines on page
11 to 17 lines on page 12).
With respect to the sentence on page 14 lines 5 to 6, the author(s) should search
more previous studies on multi databases.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.