JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this interesting Case Report and Literature
Review "MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the
Ovary".
However, I have some comments and recommendations:
Comments:
Title: - Is appropriate for the content of the article.
Abstract:- Represents a suitable summary of the work.
Case:- The methods and results have been well explained.
Conclusions:- Are justified on the basis of the study.
Recommendations:
References:- Stick to the format of the journal.
General:- Revise language, grammar and syntax.
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
I am happy having the opportunity to read and review the manuscript assigned to me, titled
“MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary: A
Case Report and Literature Review” submitted to the BMC Women's Health.
I have carefully reviewed this manuscript and below is my decision.
- Overall in the introduction, there are no clear justifications for why we need this study. To be
more specific, it is not clear why we need this research from the theoretical point of view or
what is missing from the body of our literature review. The introduction section is very poorly
written. This section should be rewritten.
-The introduction is weak. It's not fluent.
- The references is weak. References are out of date. There are two references from 2018, one
from 2019, two from 2020, zero from 2021, four from 2022, and two from 2023. Other references
are from 2017 and earlier. The subjects you are working on are constantly evolving. Literature
should be written with up-to-date references.
The current work is not suitable for publication.
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 16 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
The keywords in the abstract and text, must be the same.
Nothing has been said about FDG PET/CT in conclusion, although it is mentioned in the title,
please explain about it.
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 17 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Rajrupa Ghosh
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for providing the opportunity to review the interesting case report. The authors are
recommended to revise the manuscript as a case report only, as the review of literature section
in insufficient and hard to follow.  The revised manuscript should focus on the case report and
gaps in knowledge. Authors should consider conducting a literature review on this research area
separately.
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 17 Oct 2024
Reviewer:  Ali B. Roomi
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for asking my opinion #about #the #manuscript #entitled ##"MRI and FDG PET/CT
Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary: A Case Report and Literature
Review". #
#I believe that this manuscript should #be #major revision:#
I wanted to bring to your attention that there are several #articles relevant to your article topic
that may be of #interest to you. You might consider citing these references #to enrich your
work and provide additional context. I have #included the links to these articles below for your
#convenience #:#
#[https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=qsWZh#0sAAAAJ]. #
#[https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=572##09705942]. #
#[https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5107-5550]#
Q1. It is very important to change and modify the title. the #title #is not appropriate.#
Q2. Are the objectives and the rationale of the study #clearly #stated? #
#Q3.# In the abstract, the research gap was not clearly #stated. In #addition, the authors need to
rewrite the study #objectives #to be more academic writing
#Q4. In the introduction, include the  #study's significance #and #novelty. What makes the study
different #from #the rest #and #what #does it add to the current knowledge?#.#
Q5. In the introduction, the authors #should #have #explained #the #purpose of this study and
the #existing gaps #in #this field #and #explained why this study was #conducted.#
#Q6. Are the methods clear and replicable? Do all the #results presented to match the methods
described?#
Q7. If relevant are the results novel? Does the study #provide an advance in the field? Is the
data plausible?#
Q8. References are relevant, correct, and not #recent. #The #number #of #references should be
increased.# #please add some #references. since this is a scientific #review, all the sentences
need #to be supported with #references.#
This study is very beautiful. I liked the sequence and #enjoyed #reading. Please add more
references on similar #studies.#
#Q9. There are a lot of grammatical errors. This #must #be #taken #care #of and addressed.#
#Q10. What are the limitations of the study?# A description #of #limitations is missing at the
end of the discussion #section.#
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 18 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Ovarian small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma is a rare finding and few cases have been reported,
which makes preoperative diagnosis difficult.
Still, in the text of the manuscript authors have to point out with more details what are the
particularities and novelties of the case they presented. What is the main rationale of this
manuscript? Is the manuscript focusing on overall diagnostics that can be made to preoperatively
determine the type of ovarian tumor? If so it would be good to explain what are the phases of
diagnostics (write some subheadings ) and present the indications for further diagnostics. Or
is the manuscript goal to present all potential imaging methods? In such case authors should
state what were the indications to perform 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the first place? What are the
benefits of 18F-FDG-PET/CT compared to MRI which is generally used regarding preoperative
assessment and the type of chosen treatment?
Moreover, the abstract should be completely rewritten according to these suggestions to clearly
point out the manuscript aim and novelties of the presented case.
Title: MRI and FDG PET/CT Findings for Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the Ovary:
A Case Report and Literature Review
Version: 0 Date: 19 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors
Given the topic's importance, the rarity of similar cases, and the detailed imaging information
provided, the article has the potential for publication. However, further elaboration would
be beneficial in the discussion section, particularly regarding the clinical implications of the
findings and how the imaging information could improve diagnostic approaches. While there
are minor gaps in the comparative analysis, the rarity of the case and the value of the new
information make it a suitable candidate for publication.
Title: Evaluating the Interrelationship of Mindfulness, Sexual Relational Concern, and Health
Related Behaviors on Women's life Satisfaction Through Path Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 10 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
In the summary, include how many people worked on the method.
Add hypothesis at the end of the introduction.
If you wrote mean, you do not need median. Add when there is no normal distribution.
Add limitations.
Title: Evaluating the Interrelationship of Mindfulness, Sexual Relational Concern, and Health
Related Behaviors on Women's life Satisfaction Through Path Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 18 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
The paper is interesting; however, I raised some concerns that may improve the paper.
1. Lack of Justification for Sample Size Calculation
• The sample size calculation is based on a # = .29 from previous studies, but it does not specify
which study or how the effect size was determined. Justification for this choice and a power
analysis report are needed.
2. Potential Sample Bias Due to Convenience Sampling
• The study relies on convenience sampling from women's clinics, which limits generalizability.
The authors should discuss how this may affect the validity of the findings and acknowledge
it as a limitation.
3. Insufficient Explanation of Path Analysis Model Fit
• While model fit indices are reported, they are not adequately interpreted. The Chi-square test
(p-value is missing), CFI (1.000), and RMSEA (0.002) suggest overfitting or a perfect fit, which
is rare in real-world data. Further discussion is needed to explain why these results are valid.
4. Questionable Inclusion of Only One Dimension of Sexual Satisfaction
• The study focuses only on the sexual relational concern dimension of the Sexual Satisfaction
Scale for Women (SSS-W). The authors acknowledge this limitation but do not justify why other
dimensions were excluded.
5. Inconsistencies in the Role of Relational Concern
• The findings indicate that relational concern negatively affects life satisfaction (# = -0.11, p
= 0.087), but the effect is not statistically significant. The discussion should address why this
result is meaningful if it is not statistically significant.
6. Smoking and BMI Relationship Is Not Clearly Established
• The negative relationship between smoking and BMI (# = -0.14, p = 0.021) contradicts some
studies showing that smoking is associated with higher BMI. A stronger discussion is needed
regarding alternative explanations and cultural factors.
7. Overgeneralization in Conclusion
• The conclusion states that mindfulness interventions can enhance life satisfaction and alleviate
relationship issues, but causation cannot be inferred from a cross-sectional study. The authors
should explicitly clarify the limitations of making such claims.
Title: Evaluating the Interrelationship of Mindfulness, Sexual Relational Concern, and Health
Related Behaviors on Women's life Satisfaction Through Path Analysis
Version: 5 Date: 03 May 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful revisions to the manuscript entitled “Evaluating the
Interrelationship of Mindfulness, Sexual Relational Concern, and Health-Related Behaviors on
Women's Life Satisfaction Through Path Analysis.”
I appreciate the effort you have invested in addressing the comments and suggestions provided
during the initial review. Your inclusion of a clear conceptual framework, elaboration of
measurement strategies, and clarification of statistical procedures have notably strengthened the
methodological and theoretical foundation of the study.
The added discussion on the cultural and contextual relevance of the variables, as well as your
expanded limitations section, enhance the interpretability and academic rigor of the work. I also
commend the improvements made to the structure and clarity of the manuscript.
Thank you once again for your responsiveness and dedication to improving the quality of your
research. I believe your study offers a meaningful contribution to the literature on women's well-
being and psychosocial health.
Wishing you continued success in your scholarly work.
Warm regards,
Title: Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors
Version: 1 Date: 25 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors
- I think the article is not of original quality, but I think the results are important for the Iranian
population.
- Research contributes to the literature.
- The article is written in a clear manner with its purpose, subject content and conclusions.
- Abstract is written clearly, but it would be appropriate to write a recommendation in the
conclusion in line with the results.
- The research problem and objective are written clearly and concisely. However, in the
introduction the contribution of this study and its results for the Iranian society should be briefly
explained.
- Research questions should be written before the method. I think it will increase the
comprehensibility of the research.
- In the method section, the type of research was specified.
- The inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study were specified. However, I think that “being
sexually active” should be added to the inclusion criteria.
- In addition, 149 women were reached in which date range.
- The Cronbach's alpha of the FSFI in this study should be noted.
- In the statistical analysis section, it should be stated whether the sample fits the normal
distribution and whether parametric or nonparametric tests were applied.
- The findings are sufficient.
- The findings stated that there were 140 participants. However, the method stated that 149
female patients were included. This should be clarified…
- Were women who had surgical treatment (Mastectomy etc.) not included? If not, this should
be stated as an exclusion criterion. Or the reason should be explained.
- I think that the title of Table 4 does not reflect the table clearly. My suggestion for the table
name: “distribution of frequency of sexual disorders according to demographic and clinical
characteristics of women with breast cancer”
- Discussion is sufficient. However, the mean sexual function score of the patients was reported
as 16.41 ± 8.91 (1.2-32.3) points but not interpreted. According to this score, the level of sexual
dysfunction in this population should be explained.
- Limitations of the study are included in the text.
- The conclusion is sufficient, the responsibilities of health professionals in this field are
mentioned. recommendations are made in line with the results.
Title: Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors
Version: 3 Date: 14 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear author
"Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors"
is a very interesting manuscription. There are deficiencies in sample selection and material
method section. The corrections that need to be made in the discussion are also stated in the
manuscription and the report. Also, there are old references in the  references. If the sample and
references are updated and the necessary corrections are made, it can be published.
Sincerly
Title: Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors
Version: 3 Date: 03 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author (s);
Thank you for your work. Below are my suggestions regarding your study.
Introduction
"The statement mentions, 'However, there remains a gap in understanding the specific
demographic and clinical factors that contribute to these issues, particularly in the context of
Iranian culture, where discussing sexual health is often stigmatized.” More detailed information
should be provided regarding stigmatization in Iranian culture. The introduction section is quite
distant from explaining why women with breast cancer in Iran experience sexual dysfunction
and has been written in a rather superficial manner.
Method
In the Method section, only 140 women with breast cancer were included, and some of these
women are aged 50 and above, and some have gone through menopause. How were you able to
associate sexual dysfunction, which is free from all these factors, with breast cancer?
It’s not that easy to claim that women with breast cancer experience sexual dysfunction by using
just one scale, is it? Wouldn’t it have been necessary to make a diagnosis according to the DSM-5
for this?
Discussion
Studies of this kind have been widely conducted in the international literature. What is the main
difference in your study? You should discuss more about cultural approaches specific to Iran
and the approaches of healthcare professionals, and elaborate on this.
Conclusion
In the results section of the study, the focus is on sexual dysfunction in women with breast cancer
being largely caused by stigmas in the country. However, these stigmas are not emphasized in
the introduction and discussion sections, where they are only briefly addressed. Therefore, the
results section of the study should be revised according to the findings obtained.
Thank very much.
Title: Sexual Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Forgotten Aspect among Survivors
Version: 4 Date: 14 May 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear author;
The corrections that need to be made for the author have been indicated on the article. The most
striking in the article is a discrepancy between the average ages and the years of marriage. While
the average age is 50.78±10.07, it is unthinkable that the average marriage is 29 months or more.
The month and year may have been confused as time.
Title: Awareness of the Alcohol–Breast Cancer Link among Breast Cancer Survivors in the
United States: A National Cross-Sectional Survey
Version: 2 Date: 06 May 2025
Reviewer's report:
he research background fails to mention the physiological mechanisms underlying the
association between alcohol consumption and breast cancer incidence.
The variables selected in the study lack theoretical justification.
The study does not address direct public health interventions aimed at enhancing awareness of
alcohol consumption, and the logical hierarchy of the discussion remains unclear.
Title: The Association Between Dietary Fiber Intake and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in
Women: Findings From the NHANES 2015 - 2018
Version: 0 Date: 04 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
This article describes the association of dietary fiber intake and PID with a large sample size.
This is a valuable article, however, it has very typo-grammatical mistakes and must be revised.
The discussion section needs more revision.  the related mechanisms should be focused more.
The authors should reconsider confounder and interaction meaning. This article can be accepted
after major revision.
Title: The Association Between Dietary Fiber Intake and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in
Women: Findings From the NHANES 2015 - 2018
Version: 0 Date: 08 Mar 2025
Reviewer:  Niloufar Rasaei
Reviewer's report:
This cross-sectional study investigates the association between dietary fiber intake and pelvic
inflammatory disease (PID) using data from the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey (NHANES). The study is well-structured, with a clear hypothesis and
robust statistical methods. The findings suggest that higher dietary fiber intake is associated with
a lower prevalence of PID, particularly in women with higher fiber consumption. The study
contributes valuable insights into the potential role of diet in preventing PID, a condition with
significant public health implications. However, there are several areas where the manuscript
could be improved for clarity, methodological rigor, and interpretation of results.
Introduction:
1. The introduction provides a thorough background on PID and the potential role of diet in
its prevention. However, the rationale for focusing on dietary fiber specifically could be better
emphasized. Why is dietary fiber particularly relevant for PID prevention?
Methods:
2. The description of the NHANES data collection process is clear, but more details on the
validation of the dietary recall method in NHANES would be helpful. How reliable is the dietary
data, and what steps were taken to ensure its accuracy?
3. The exclusion criteria are appropriate, but the authors should clarify how many participants
were excluded for each reason and whether this might have introduced selection bias.
Discussion:
4. The discussion is comprehensive but could benefit from a more critical evaluation of the
study's limitations. For example, how might the cross-sectional design and self-reported data
have influenced the results?
5. The authors should also discuss the potential public health implications of their findings in
more detail. How might these results inform dietary recommendations for women at risk of PID?
6. The study could be strengthened by exploring potential biological mechanisms linking dietary
fiber intake to PID, such as inflammatory biomarkers or gut microbiota composition.
7. The authors should discuss how their findings could be translated into public health
interventions, particularly for women at risk of PID.
Conclusion:
8. The conclusion is concise but could be expanded to include specific recommendations for
future research, such as longitudinal studies or intervention trials to establish causality.
Title: The Association Between Dietary Fiber Intake and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in
Women: Findings From the NHANES 2015 - 2018
Version: 2 Date: 31 May 2025
Reviewer's report:
Cross-sectional analysis : Causality cannot be established
Use of large, representative sample (NHANES) is a strength
Focused on the target population by including only female participants
Dietary feedback was collected with two 24-h recalls # increased data reliability
Limitations:
PID diagnosis based on self-report (diagnostic accuracy may be debatable)
Fiber type (soluble/insoluble) and source (fruit/grain/vegetable) are not separated
Fiber consumption was measured at the moment; it may not reflect long-term habits
Socioeconomic and cultural context may not be generalizable to non-NHANES populations
Clinical Relevance:
PID can lead to serious complications in women, such as infertility, chronic pelvic pain and
ectopic pregnancy.
The anti-inflammatory effects of fiber may influence PID pathophysiology through immune
modulation and SCFA (short-chain fatty acid) production.
This study points to the potential role of diet-based prevention in infectious/inflammatory
gynecological diseases such as PID.
Biological Mechanism Proposal:
Fiber modifies the gut microbiota, increasing the production of SCFAs (butyrate, propionate,
acetate)
SCFAs:
Suppresses inflammatory pathways such as NF-#B and HDAC
Indirectly stabilizes the vaginal microbiota
Increases estrogen metabolism # strengthens the protective structure of the vaginal epithelium
Fiber is also taken together with anti-inflammatory micronutrients such as magnesium #
synergistic effect
Strengths:
Analysis showing for the first time a large-scale study linking fiber consumption to PID
Using NHANES data: strong in representativeness and quality
Statistical analyses are detailed, versatile and well planned.
The threshold effect and the nonlinear relationship (L-curve) are significant for public health.
Weaknesses:
Self-reported PID diagnosis reduces reliability
It is difficult to make specific recommendations because the type and source of fiber are not
separated.
Cross-sectional design # causality cannot be claimed
Other lifestyle factors associated with fiber consumption may not have been fully controlled
Recommendations for Future Research:
Prospective cohorts and RCTs should be conducted
Fiber sources and types should be analyzed separately (e.g. grains, vegetables, fruits)
Direct effects of fiber supplements on PID should be investigated
Multi-omics studies focusing on the “gut-reproductive system axis” should be conducted.
Conclusion
This study shows a strong inverse relationship between PID prevalence and fiber consumption in
women . Dietary fiber intake of 19.45 g/day is associated with a significant reduction in the risk
of PID, and this level stands out as a public health target in terms of both practical applicability
and cost-effectiveness.
Final recommendation : Increasing daily fiber intake to above 19.5 grams may be recommended
as a low-risk and feasible strategy to reduce the risk of PID in women.
Title: The Association Between Dietary Fiber Intake and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in
Women: Findings From the NHANES 2015 - 2018
Version: 2 Date: 02 Jun 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this intersting paper.
The use of NHANES data strengthens the credibility of the analysis.
You employ advanced statistical methods, which adds rigors.
Add a space between "2015-2018" for clarity.
Consider specifying the population (e.g., women or reproductive-age women) for precision