Reviewer’s report
Title: Exploring young women ’s reasons for adopting intrauterine or oral emergency contraception in
the United States: a qualitative study
Version: 0 Date: 20 Nov 2019
Reviewer: Karar Zunaid Ahsan
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for preparing this manuscript to explore factors that influence patients' choice
between  ECPs  and  the  copper  IUD  as  emergency  contraception.  I  have  the  following
comments/suggestions for the authors' consideration:
1. Given the study setting, the authors may consider revising the title of the paper to "Exploring young
women's reasons for adopting intrauterine or oral emergency contraception in the United States: a
qualitative study"
2. p.9, line 49, Table 1: From column title "IUD as EC", 'as EC' can be dropped
3. p.10, lines 12-14, Table 1: For uniformity, 16-17 and 18-19 age groups can be merged into 16-19
4. p.10, line 38, Table 1: Column total for "Has ever been pregnant" does not add up
5. p.13, lines 237-245: This text would be better placed under the following sub-section (i.e., "Negative
experiences with the IUD...")
6. p.15, lines 287-289: Should Rebecca's response be classified under a separate heading, something
like  "(low)  service  availability"  instead  of  here?  The  authors  touched  on  the  access  issue  in
conclusions, but has any other respondent highlighted this as well?
7. p.15, lines 289-291: it should be placed under the sub-section "Negative experiences with the IUD..."
8. p.20, line 400: Though the cited paper stated repeated use of u. acetate to be safe, the American
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) advises not to use ECPs repeatedly (Practice
Bulletin #152 [2015, reaffirmed 2018])
9. p.21, line 418: Since the authors used both a priori and emergent codes, did they face any issue with
the app used? As with Dedoose it is difficult to split a code, once the excerpt is coded, into smaller
coded excerpts.
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 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