Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Couple's concordance and discordance in househ old decision -making and married 
women's  use of modern contraceptives i n Bangladesh  
 
Version: 0 Date: 04 Aug 2017  
 
Reviewer: Betty Kwagala  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The study's main strength as noted by the authors is considering couples rather than indi viduals 
in decision making.  
 
 
 
 
Methods:  
 
* Were the data weighted?  
 
 
* Why combine traditional with modern contraceptive use? The contention is usually over 
modern contraception.  On the basis of  consideration of concerns over effectiveness, could the 
authors consider modern contraception? It may be necessary to justify this choice.  
 
 
The section on the variables needs more clarification.  
 
* Instead of considering employment status, could the authors consider occupation? Different 
kinds of employment have varying demands and may entail different exposure that could have a 
bearing on contraceptive use (see lines 48 -51). 
 
 
* How was the outcome variable derived?  
 
 
* Ethics - The authors need to indicate in this section that they used the data with permission 
from Measure DHS.  
 
 
Findings  
 
* (Depending on the journal style) in the text the authors should round off the decimal places (for 
%)  to whole nu mbers or a maximum of one decimal place. Consistency in style of presentation 
throughout the paper is desirable (e.g. lines 178 -186).  
* In Table 1 the totals vary for most of the variables, the authors may need to look again at the 
selection procedure.   
 
 
o Whose residence, religion, employment status, Exposure to FP messages  did the authors 
consider? Are these marched for the couple or pertain to the woman?  
 
 
o The percentages for the variable "Exposure to FP information"  do not add up to 100%. Please 
check  if there is a filter question since the cases are less than half.  
 
 
o Consider using one decimal place.  
 
 
o Perhaps it is better to use DHS categories of the household wealth index (poorer, poor etc) .  
 
 
* In the discussion and concluding sections, the authors  should comment on the variation of 
importance of different aspects of household decision making with respect to the outcome. Not 
all decisions carry the same weight or are actually associated, depending on the outcome 
variables. The array of decision maki ng measures to be explored (lines 350 -351) should have 
some rational linkage to the outcome.  
 
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to t he authors.  
 
No 
 
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 manuscript or would you recommend an  
additi onal statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I recommend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of l anguage in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the follow ing questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any s tocks 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 for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial compe ting 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.  
 
I declare no competing interests.  
 
I agree to  the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along w ith the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n 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 c an be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal