Title: Prevalence and factors associated with early childbearing in sub-Saharan Africa: evidence
from demographic and health surveys of 31 countries
Version: 1 Date: 20 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. The authors sought to examine the
determinants of early fertility behaviour among young women in SSA.  I must say that this is
an important topic with significant implications for policy and practice. However, I have some
comments to improve the quality of the paper.
Abstract
1. The authors must state the full meaning of FP2020 .
Introduction
2. Correct this "SSAand" in Line 113.
3. The authors have to be consistent with the formatting language used. If it's US English, it
should be consistent. If it's UK English, then that should be consistent. E.g.,  "programs" in Line
114 but "behaviour" in Line 116.
4. It is imperative for the authors to explain what they mean by fertility behaviour right from the
onset. This is meaning in the background information.
5. It is impressive to see the authors mention the Classical Demographic Transition Theory and
the Empowerment Theory. However, I suggest that the authors dedicate a sub-section to discuss
these theories and show how they can explain fertility behaviour.
6. Why focus on only those aged 20-29? I ask this question because the authors argue that women
in vulnerable populations are likely to experience early fertility behaviour during adolescence
(See Lines 123-124).
7. In addition to the comment stated, how were young women conceptualised?  Young women
according to the WHO and UN is 20-24. Therefore, why 20-29 years? This goes back to the
point that early fertility behaviour was poorly explained.
8. The authors also have to justify why SSA was chosen but not a particular question.
Methods
9. Why is Table 1 presented as an image?
10. The authors must justify why the explanatory variables used were selected.
Discussion
11. The authors state in Lines 280-281 that, "Study results revealed that the prevalence of young
women who experienced early childbirth in sub-Saharan Africa was still high at 36%". Per
what metrics or comparison is this statement being made? At least the authors can help readers
understand what the past situation has been before making this statement.
12. How does the 36% observed differ from other what has been found in other studies?
13. I think that the discussion is poorly drafted. It must tell a story in chronological order.
Therefore, after discussing the overall proportion, it would have been best to continue with the
differences across the countries before the discussion of the significant explanatory variables.
14. I am disappointed to see that the two theories mentioned in the introduction did not feature
anywhere in the discussion of the results. The authors must relate the theory to the findings.
Strengths and limitations
15. "The utilisation of multi-country datasets enhanced the estimation of the pooled prevalence
of early childbirth in the region. A wide range of factors were assessed in this study to strengthen
the associations observed." How does this become a strength. Much clarity is needed here.
Change "were" to "was"
Conclusion
16. Lines 398-400: "Further research is needed to expand the scope of this current analysis
by investigating the linkages between beliefs, social norms and fertility desire with adolescent
fertility behaviour. " Remember the focus was on young women not adolescents. Rectify this.