Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Texas women ’s decisions and experiences with self -managed abortion  
 
Version: 1 Date: 05 Apr 2019  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
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 autho r'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 s ound?  
 
Yes - current version is technically sound  
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: The author has fully responded to the review comments and updated 
the manuscript. The paper has improved quite a bit.  
 
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
 
The design  of the study remains weak but this has been acknowledged and a recommendation 
made for further more thorough studies. With this the manuscript can be published.  
 
Are th e methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscr ipt: 
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1.  Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary 
from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the 
publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2.  Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or 
lose financially from the publication of this  manuscript, either now or in the 
future?  
 
3.  Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content 
of the manuscript?  
 
4.  Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization 
that holds or has applied f or patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5.  Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6.  Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these revi ews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution  License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews s uch as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named repor t 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand  that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal