Reviewer’s report
Title: Investigating the quality of family planning counselling as part of routine antenatal care and
its effect on intended postpartum contraceptive method choice among women in Nepal
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jan 2020
Reviewer: Anne Pfitzer
Reviewer's report:
I feel the authors have addressed my comments well. If they wish to buttress their addition of a
recommended brochure for husbands, they can can cite or refer to Cooper CM, Fields R, Mazzeo CI,
Taylor N, Pfitzer A, Momolu M, et al. Successful proof of concept of FP and immunization integration
in Liberia. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2015;3(1):71-84. That program sought to reach postpartum women
with PPFP information and intrafacility referrals during immunization visits. But if a woman refused a
referral, she was offered a brochure to take to and discuss with her husband. Lastly, I appreciate that the
authors have added content related to client-centered counseling in the discussion. But I would further
advise removing the recommendation to discuss the pros and cons of each choice. Some counseling
approaches, such as Balanced Counseling Strategy Plus use an algorithm to ask women questions about
their circumstances and based on those responses eliminate any counseling on methods that are clearly
not suitable for that client at that time. So for example, if a client says she wants to have 3 children and
this is her first pregnancy, there is no need to discuss the pros and cons of sterilization. or if she says
her husband is not supportive of contraception, then there is no point in discussing standard days
method, condoms or vasectomy (at least until her situation changes). But focusing on the range of
methods that are appropriate for that client at that time is still high quality counseling. My ealier
feedback about the value of this paper to the body of literature on PPFP counseling stands and I look
forward to seeing the published article.
Are the 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.
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
additional statistical review?
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further
assessment in your comments to the editors.
Not relevant to this manuscript
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
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, 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 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 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 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.
I declare having 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 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 included as confidential comments
to the editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal