Reviewer’s report
Title: “The best thing is that you are doing it for yourself. ”– Perspectives on acceptability and
feasibility of HPV self-sampling among cervical cancer screening clients in Tanzania: A
qualitative pilot study
Version: 0 Date: 25 Aug 2019
Reviewer: Folkert Van Kemenade
Reviewer's report:
The best thing is that you are doing it for yourself."- Perspectives of HPV self-sampling for cervical
cancer screening in Tanzania. 
This is a nice effort to study acceptability of this approach. However, I have three issues with this
manuscript. 
1. Too small a study.
Given its aim, i.e. the objective of this study is to investigate how feasible and acceptable Tanzanian
women find HPV self-sampling as a cervical cancer screening method as compared to a provider based
HPV sampling, which involves a gynecological examination, a pilot with 21 women is quite modest
and questionable for its representation for 'Tanzanian women'.
2.  Methodology is  more  a  user  feedback  interview  for  feasibility than  an  in-dept  interview  (for
behavioural determinants), in other words, with an 'in depth' interview, I would have expected a little
more on determinants for screening next to user feedback. This questionnaire seemed more useful for
user feedback. That's fine with me, as long as it is clearly indicated in the M&amp;M section. 
3. Lack of control (non-urban; another device). 
Authors correctly identify limitations (small study, urban women, inherent issues with the device). So,
why not extend it with another device or externally validate this approach for non-urban setting for
generalizing its conclusions? How about a control with another device (eg Rovers or some other
contraption) where the bottleneck of breaking off the tip into the vial is much less of an issue. The
Qvintip itself may have increased perceived difficulty and increased demand for nurse assistance. In
other  words, can  authors  exclude  that  alternative  explanation.  Without  a  control,  that  may seem
difficult. 
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.
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
No
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.
I am able to assess the statistics
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 that I have 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