JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Construction of a nomogram for personalized prediction of lower limb lymphedema risk
after cervical cancer surgery
Version: 4 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This version is widely improved however following issues remain unaddressed:
Old comment: Why age and BMI were dichotomized instead of being modeled as continuous
variable, which is more appropriate in most of logistic modeling. Is there any supporting
evidence for the cut-offs chosen over using continuous values?
Response: “An age of 60 years and a BMI of 24 kg/m² are used as cut-off points for defining
elderly and overweight categories, respectively. Although age is a continuous variable, it is
generally rounded to integers in practice and thus often treated as a discrete variable.”
Comment: rounding to integers is never an issue when using age and BMI as continuous variable.
And authors didn’t give any supporting evidence of choosing the particular cut-off points.
Old comment: “Multivariate logistic regression analysis”
the analysis done was multivariable analysis instead of multivariate analysis, two of them are
fundamentally different, if authors are not clear about these terms, please refer to this article:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518362/
Response: Thank you for the professional suggestion. Verification and correction have
been made; in this study, logistic regression analysis refers to multifactor regression analysis.
Comment: Many occurrences of term “Multivariate” were not correct though out the manuscript
and table.
Old comment: “Constant” in table 3, did author mean “intercept”?
Not addressed.
Old comment: “The DCA curve shows that the nomogram model” should be “the logistic
model”?
Response: Thank you for the professional suggestion. A nomogram is a visualization of a
complex statistical model.
Comment: Sounds like authors don’t understand what is the so called “complex statistical
model”. I will just give the direct instructions: nomogram is a visualization, and here you are
using logistic model if I’m not mistaking. (which is a basic model and not complex at all, just
FYI) In this case, the wording of “The DCA curve shows that the nomogram model” is incorrect.
Because nomogram as a plot is not a model. The correct wording is for example, “constructed a
nomogram plot”, “The DCA curve shows that the logistic model…”, please change those though
out the manuscript and also the manuscript title.
I see the tables in the manuscript were updated but not in the separate file of < Tables.doc>
Please be aware about that.
Title: Culture, community, and cancer: Understandings of breast cancer from a non-lived
experience among women living in Soweto
Version: 1 Date: 04 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The work presented by the authors is technically sound, highlighting the health literacy gaps
surrounding breast cancer among community-dwelling women in Soweto, South Africa. The
authors present the socio-cultural influence on fear, misperceptions, stigma, and fatalism.
Their methods are outlined appropriately but would benefit from discussion of what software,
if any, was used to reveal the emergent themes in the IDIs.
Following the results was difficult, however – I suggest the authors find a more suitable way
of presenting their findings and illustrative quotes. One example is table 2a – it could be split
up and each overarching section (i.e., fear of cancer treatments and effects) be described. While
this may result in a longer paper or more tables, it will make it easier for the reader to follow
along and will better showcase the findings of the authors.
Overall, this is a well-written paper that only needs minor adjustments and clarifications.
Title: Reflections on Timing of Motherhood - A Qualitative Online Study with Women of
Reproductive Age.
Version: 3 Date: 08 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting study on the important topic of fertility timing/postponement in the global
north. However, my main issue with the study is that the main objective is quite vague and
not very clear. The introduction is not very convincing with regard to what this study actually
contributes to the literature. The fact that previous studies have not used a social media setting
is not sufficient.
Where are the men? The authors should elaborate on why this study focusses on women (and
not men). Fertility decision making typically involves both partners in a couple, women and
men. There is lots of (demographic) research highlighting how a) partners interact in decision-
making, and b) women and men differ in their fertility desires, timing prospects, etc. By
focussing exclusively on women not acknowledging men’s part research contributes to making
reproduction a women’s topic (which I truly believe it is not).
In order to judge the research design it is necessary to make the questions (or the themes) the
participants received on each day from the facilitator available in the manuscript (appendix?).
It cannot be expected that readers check out another publication for this purpose.
smaller issues:
It is not clear why the authors cite literature on fertility knowledge and refer to it even in the
abstract. To my understanding this paper is not investigating whether the participants have good
knowledge about for example age-related fertility decline and how this affects fertility timing
decisions. References to fertility knowledge should be dropped to make the paper clearer.
The number of quotes per subtheme varies a lot. Its probably not meant to, but it gives the
impression of different “weights” attached to the subthemes. Is this intended?
Title: Reflections on Timing of Motherhood - A Qualitative Online Study with Women of
Reproductive Age.
Version: 5 Date: 15 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
I believe the manuscript has improved substantially after revision. I really like the new title. I
have only a few minor comments that I hope you will take in to account:
Methods section
I still believe that the manuscript will improve if you elaborate a bit more on the benefits
(and difficulties) of having emojis in your transcriptions. It does not need to be an exhausting
description. I do not agree that it is enough to refer to your other study.
Discussion section
In the sentence you agreed should be corrected “…the women in this study were compared with
their female friends and colleagues” you have deleted “were”, but I still believe you need to
add “themselves” to the sentence. I believe it should be like this: “…the women in this study
compared themselves with their female friends and colleagues”
Title: Reflections on Timing of Motherhood - A Qualitative Online Study with Women of
Reproductive Age.
Version: 6 Date: 04 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
The text has improved in interpreting different findings by age group.
There is still a theoretical gap between what’s presented as a background and the content
of the analysis. Possibly, limited fertility awareness may be discussed regarding the finding
that ‘Most of the women in this study described an expectation of having the same
reproductive opportunities or limitations as their biological female relatives’ (p.22). However, as
acknowledged by the authors in their response letter, the paper doesn’t study fertility awareness
and infertility – however, these topics are very much present in the abstract and introduction.
Instead, the paper could introduce more efficiently why their study is of interest.
Partly because of this finding, I am still reluctant to say that online settings can ‘contribute to
increase women’s fertility awareness.’ (p.26) and that ‘Women in this study benefitted from
discussing timing of motherhood with other women of reproductive age on social media.’ (p.28).
There is no evidence of that in the paper.
I’m only mentioning that at this stage because I was expecting more amendments, but the text
also needs some language editing.
Title: Reflections on Timing of Motherhood - A Qualitative Online Study with Women of
Reproductive Age.
Version: 7 Date: 26 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
I am satisfied with the revision of the manuscript. The authors have improved the text in showing
where their contribution lies in.
I only spotted a couple of typos and minor writing amendments to implement:
- p.1, delete the comma after “who not yet had children”.
- I would delete “still” p.1, 5th sentence in the introduction.
- Delete “and” before “helpful” on p.5.
- “Lavender et al. (2015) describe” instead of “describes” p.23
- In “THE age groupS 26-34 and 35-45 years” (p.24)
Title: Empowerment Through Technology: Domestic Violence Acceptance Among Iraqi
Women in an Intersectional Context
Version: 3 Date: 16 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. The study investigates the factors
associated with the acceptance of domestic violence among Iraqi women, looking at both factors
that tend to be associated with higher and lower acceptance. The link to digital empowerment
was also drawn but could be further explored. The results are important although quite
jarring and should be considered in light of the associated factors for additional research and
understanding.
Title: Empowerment Through Technology: Domestic Violence Acceptance Among Iraqi
Women in an Intersectional Context
Version: 4 Date: 04 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for this important and interesting study. The paper is well written and structured,
contains comprehensive literature review and discussion and sufficient details of the methods
are provided.
I have the following comments/suggestions;
1. It would be helpful to provide some figures (numbers) in the results sub-section of the abstract,
such as ORs.
2. In Iraqi and any other Islamic culture, it is important to discuss the misinterpretation/
misunderstanding of some religious verses regard violence against women and its acceptance.
This could be incorporated into the Introduction or Discussion section.
3. Recommendations for further research in this field has been provided, however, one important
recommended research field could be exploring through qualitative studies the reasons for such
high acceptance rate.
Title: DIGNIFIED CARE AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG MOTHERS WHO
GAVE BIRTH AT PUBLIC HOSPITALS, IN SIDAMA REGIONAL STATE, SOUTHERN
ETHIOPIA, 2023
Version: 1 Date: 07 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Editors and Authors,
Thank you very much for the opportunity, and I appreciate the editors considering me to review
this manuscript.
Congratulations to the Authors on this manuscript. This is an important study contributing to
the knowledge creation of dignified care. In Table 3, the authors look at whether women can
maintain their privacy. It is interesting that most women seem unable to maintain privacy, which
is a crucial component of dignified care. I was wondering why the privacy component is not
included in the logistic regression analysis.
Moreover, regarding the discussion part. I like how the authors compared their findings
with other studies that have been done and provided some potential reasons for differences/
similarities. However, I would love to see the authors comment on why the magnitude of
dignified care is relatively low, the implications of the findings and link it to how the provision
of care in the field could be improved. By providing more information on these, I think this
research could be very useful to improve the quality of maternal care provision in the setting.
Title: DIGNIFIED CARE AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG MOTHERS WHO
GAVE BIRTH AT PUBLIC HOSPITALS, IN SIDAMA REGIONAL STATE, SOUTHERN
ETHIOPIA, 2023
Version: 1 Date: 28 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to review this interesting manuscript. Please note that I am not
competent to assess your use of statistics. You need to understand that I can only read and write
in English so am very impressed that you report a study in a language other than your mother
tongue. Unfortunately your use of English grammar etc is lacking and deteriorates as the paper
progresses. The results should be written in the past tense. I could not see any information on
how you gained access to undertake the study - you did report how you gained Research Ethics
approval. Your spelling is not always correct and because of your use of language I question
the accuracy of the translations into Amaric and back translation. If the editors have gained
statistical approval for the report I would be willing to assist you with editing the manuscript.
Title: Impacts of inequalities in utilization of key maternal health service on fertility Preference
among high parity women in four selected regions of Ethiopia
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments to the Author
I acknowledge  the effort of the authors for investigating issues relevant to maternal health. I
made comments that will help to increase clarity of the manuscript using track change. Below
the  general recommendations and questions
• To use EDHS data first, we have to request it online and get approval, which is not indicated
in this document.
I recommend  Effect than impact for the  title
• The inequalities in the utilization of key maternal health services in these regions are known,
but it would be better if you indicated this in the introduction section of this document.
• It is advisable to report 0.001 rather than 0.00 of #2 (P value) (table 3,5).
• Table five was for both AOR and PAF, but the report was for PAF.
• I was expecting you to present the overall fertility preference level in this document, but you
missed it. What was the overall preference level?
• Under the conclusion you presented, “This study revealed that key maternal health services,
such as place of delivery and current contraceptive use, and socioeconomic factors (such as
religion, type of place of residence, and wealth index), influence the inequalities in fertility
preference among high-parity women in four regions of Ethiopia. "Really, your objective is to
address inequalities in fertility preference among high-parity women?
• Religion and residence were among the predictors what was your recommendations?
Title: Impacts of inequalities in utilization of key maternal health service on fertility Preference
among high parity women in four selected regions of Ethiopia
Version: 2 Date: 29 Aug 2024
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 author'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 sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have addressed the reviewers' concerns and revised
accordingly as evident from highlighted section of the revised manuscript. It is satisfactory.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
None"
Title: Prevalence and determinants of depression among women with urinary incontinence: a
systematic review and meta-analysis worldwide
Version: 1 Date: 04 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to review your manuscript. I found it to be
well-written and highly engaging. However, I do have some feedback that I believe will be
beneficial for the enhancement of your work. Firstly, while the methodology is well-structured,
I suggest revisiting the introduction section for potential improvements. Secondly, I recommend
including references to your PROSPERO number and the PRISMA checklist in the materials and
methods section. Additionally, I encourage you to further elaborate on the clinical significance
of your findings and discuss potential avenues for future research in this area. Lastly, I advise
working on improving the overall quality of English in the manuscript, either by collaborating
with a native English-speaking colleague or seeking assistance from a professional copyediting
service.
Title: Prevalence and determinants of depression among women with urinary incontinence: a
systematic review and meta-analysis worldwide
Version: 1 Date: 11 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
I have considerations regarding the study.
It is necessary to include more details about the population studied (age, type of urinary
incontinence...) and the time of publication of the studies in the inclusion e exclusion criteria.
It is necessary to clarify which data were collected from the included studies to meet the study's
objectives and carry out meta-analyses.
It is necessary to include the search strategy for all databases as an appendix.
In the discussion, the authors are repeating the results and do not discuss them with the existing
literature. It is necessary to discuss the results!
Title: Prevalence and determinants of depression among women with urinary incontinence: a
systematic review and meta-analysis worldwide
Version: 1 Date: 13 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
- O artigo aborda um tema relevante, relacionando mulheres com depressão e incontinência
urinária. No entanto, sugiro que se inclua na introdução mais dados epidemiológicos atuais sobre
a prevalência da incontinência urinária e seus impactos na qualidade de vida.
- Afirmar que existe uma relação causal direta entre a incontinência urinária e a depressão pode
ser excessivamente enfático.  Recomendo reformular as conclusões, destacando que os achados
indicam uma associação significativa, mas que mais estudos são necessários. Exemplo: "Os
resultados sugerem uma forte associação entre a incontinência urinária e depressão, no entanto,
mais estudos são necessárias para esclarecer a natureza dessa relação.
- O artigo menciona algumas limitações, como a heterogeneidade dos estudos que foram
incluídos. Sugiro que a seção de limitações seja mais aprofundada, como discutir a qualidade dos
estudos incluídos. Além disso, seria importante considerar a possibilidade de viés de publicação
e como isso pode influenciar nos resultados apresentados.
- Alguns estudos citados no artigo são relativamente antigos. Recomendo verificar se há
publicações mais recentes, em especial aos dados epidemiológicos. Em particular, sugiro revisar
a referência 8 da introdução para verificar se há uma versão mais recente disponível.
- PRISMA
Os autores precisam verificar novamente as diretrizes do PRISMA. Por exemplo, temos o
PRISMA direcionado apenas para o resumo (verificar itens 3, 7, 8, 9).  Da lista de verificação
geral, verificar os itens de 16 a 22.
Title: Investigation of the relationship between breast cancer and clinical symptoms of
polycystic ovarian syndrome: a case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 12 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Nuran Gençtürk
Reviewer's report:
Dear author, the changes that need to be made to the article have been stated.
In the article;
- In the abstract and background it is written "Here, the clinical symptoms of PCOS are compared
with the risk factors of breast cancer. This is not possible. The clinical symptoms of PCOS and
the clinical symptoms of breast cancer are different. Here, the risk factors of PCOS and breast
cancer can be compared." This is not possible.
- Is this a comparison of the clinical symptoms of PCOS in women with breast cancer and the
clinical symptoms of PCOS in women without breast cancer?
- The method has not been used very well.
- It is not possible with the statements of the people in the control group without breast cancer.
Here, it should be confirmed with diagnostic methods that there is no breast cancer.
- A very old refernce was used. A current refern
ce from the last five years should be used.
Good work
Title: Mesh-Associated Pain Syndrome: Predictors for Continence and Prolapse Mesh Removal
Surgery in a Single Centre
Version: 2 Date: 01 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
Polypropylene mesh has been used as material for vaginal reconstruction for both stress urinary
incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Whether polypropylene is the optimal material for
such indications has been called into question by FDA and clinicians. From this point of
view this manuscript is very important. It has been repotrted that clinical outcome following
mesh implantation is influenced by material properties (currently, lightweight, macroporous,
monofilament type I mesh is the only recommended type of urogynecologic mesh), surgeon’s
experience, product design, overall mesh size, route of implantation, patient characteristics,
and associated procedures (e.g. hysterectomy). If you could comment on all these parameters
in the discussion section. Unfortunately, the authors did not write about the one of the main
factor associated with the occurrence of pain after surgery, which in my opinion is not only the
mesh, but the experience of the surgeon. In line with the above based on the available scientific
evidence, the SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks)
in the opinion on „The safety of surgical meshes used in urogynecological surgery” recommends
the introduction of a certification system for surgeons based on existing international guidelines
and established in cooperation with the relevant European Surgical Associations.
Moreover, In my opinion, statistics are too “extensive” for one publication. Please consider
limiting statistical analyzes to the most important ones to make the manuscript more readable.
I also want to draw attention to the message regarding midurethral sling insertion (discussion
section).   It has been shown that the polypropylene midurethral sling has helped millions of
women with SUI by undergoing a procedure that allows them to return to daily life very quickly.
With its acknowledged safety and efficacy, it has created an environment for a much larger
numer of women to have access to treatment (AUGS and SUFU position statement). In the past,
concerns over failure and invasiveness of surgery caused a substantial percentage of incontinent
women to live without treatment. One of the unintended consequences of this polypropylene
mesh controversy has been to keep women from receiving any treatment for SUI. This procedure
is probably the most important advancement in the treatmentof stress urinary incontinence in
the last 50 years and has the full support of our organizations whichare dedicated to improving
the lives of women with urinary incontinence (AUGS and SUFU position statement).
Title: Infertility Treatments and Risk of Breast Benign Diseases: a Case#Control Study
Version: 0 Date: 04 Apr 2024
Reviewer:  Ban Hadi Hameed
Reviewer's report:
dear authors thanks for the valuable work
why you include IUI and it is clear that it has no effect on hormonal or breast disorders risk if
not combined with ovulation induction treatment
objective of the study are repeated with the methods, it needs to be unified and mentioned with
the introduction only
table 1 age of first pregnancy  please revise the numbers as there is some mistakes