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: 1 Date: 15 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Bonnie Jerome-D'Emilia
Reviewer's report:
Please include all comments  for the authors in this  box rather than uploading your report as an
attachment. Please only upload as attachments annotated versions of manuscripts, graphs, supporting
materials or other aspects of your report which cannot be included in a text format.
Just some minor questions:
Page 3 background - you might move the sentence about inequity until after you state that the vaccine
is not implemented in low income countries - or at least explain that the inequity is due to 1. Poor
uptake of vaccine or limited vaccination programs and 2. Low utilization of screening. That is I'm
assuming that is why the rate of cervical cancer is higher in low income countries - are there any other
reasons why the rate is so much higher in these countries?
Page 4 - "HPV self-sampling is considered as specific as provider-sampling and thus an acceptable
alternative" - is there only one study that has compared the specificity of the 2 methods? Did that study
use all the different types of devices mentioned here?
Page 12 - how do the authors know that the women did not wait 3 minutes? Self report or was someone
watching them? Was there a nurse in the room for all the women while they performed the self-
sampling? If so many women felt unsure of themselves and wanted a nurse present, is this something
that in the future it is expected that women will be able to do at home alone? What is the goal of seeing
if they can do it themselves?
Page 18 - having a nurse at home during the testing seems too labor intensive if the goal is to get the
women to do this at home and then send it or return it to the clinic. 
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.
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