JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Reviewer's report
Title:Primary Health Care Use from the Perspective of Gender and Morbidity
Burden
Version:1Date:24 September 2014
Reviewer: Chih-Ming Lin
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. Introduction
The authors reported that very few articles analyse these differences in a broad
age range or take into account morbidity [17]. It would be better to provide recent
evidence because the reference published in 2000 may be out of date.
2. Methods
a. The study was carried out using the information from electronic medical
records gathered at several PHC Centres. The authors should consider if IRB
approval is needed.
b. Please show the sample selection details, such as the number of patients
excluded, etc.
c. Patients may have a different ADG at each visit. How can the number of visits
in ADG groups be measured for each patient?
3. Results
The results showed that the PHC utilization was higher for women than for men.
This could be caused by a sex effect or the proportion of each sex in the
population. The authors are advised to describe the distribution of the sexes
within the entire population (i.e. including those who have no attendance).
4. Discussion
The study reported a combination of social and biological causes for the
differences in health of men and women. More visits by women can be attributed
to the fact that there are more older adult women and that women have higher
ADG than men. However, few references and little discussion addressed the
mechanisms for those causes. It is unclear to what reference 30 refers to.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. The utilization of resources was measured by the number of visits to the PHC
Centre. Therefore, it would be suitable to use “number of visits” as an outcome
variable.
2. In Table 1, with the exception of “number of individuals,” adding the
percentage would make it easier for readers. In addition, statistics methods
should be noted.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Primary Health Care Use from the Perspective of Gender and Morbidity
Burden
Version:2Date:22 October 2014
Reviewer: Chih-Ming Lin
Reviewer's report:
None.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Primary Health Care Use from the Perspective of Gender and Morbidity
Burden
Version:2Date:25 October 2014
Reviewer: Kimmo Räsänen
Reviewer's report:
I have now considered the response of the authors to my original review report. I
found the authors had taken into account the suggested revisions, and when not
possible written reasonable explanation for the sitaution, The manuscript has
been corrected accordingly, and from my point of view ready for publication.
Kimmo Räsänen
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Men's knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer screening in Kenya
Version:2Date:7 September 2014
Reviewer: Michelle S. Williams
Reviewer's report:
The study reported in this manuscript addressed an important public health
issues. The authors clearly stated the purpose of the study and used appropriate
methods to conduct the study. The article is well written without any significant
grammatical errors.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. Please provide a more clear explanation of information about HIV was
included in this manuscript. While the immunosuppression caused by HIV/AIDS
can be a risk for factor for cervical dysphasia, there is no clear explanation of
why that information is reported in this manuscript.
2. Please make sure that you include a reference to table 4 in your manuscript.
There should be an explanation of the data in table 4 including the manner in
which the frequency of responses were computed. What is the denominator?
3. The discussion of limitations should include a limitation of the
representativeness of the study results since there was such a high percentage
of HIV positive males included in the sample.
4. The inclusion of the percentage of HIV positive men in the abstract appears to
be irrelevant.
Discretionary Revisions
4. The the inclusion of data about the participant’s HIV status is questionable
being that the authors did not explicitly discuss the association between
HIV/AIDS and cervical cancer.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Men's knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer screening in Kenya
Version:2Date:8 September 2014
Reviewer: Camille Ragin
Reviewer's report:
No Major compulsory revisions noted. This is an interesting study investigating a
very important topic. the novelty in itself is the design of the study i.e. the
assessment of male knowledge and attitudes towards cervical cancer screening.
The results are clear.
Minor revisions: it is not necessary to present the % for each row if the column
header already indicates that the presented numbers are percents.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Post-coital posterior fornix perforation with vaginal evisceration
Version:3Date:10 September 2014
Reviewer: IOANNIS NIKOLOPOULOS
Reviewer's report:
No major compulsory revisions
Minor Revisions
1. Abstract. Connclusion. First line. Write suspicion instead of "suspicious"
2. A speculum examination was performed prior to the laparotomy which
revealed the vaginal perforation. Was the prolapsed bowel reduced by that point
in order to see the injury to the vagina?
Discretionary Revisions
1. Was laparoscopy considered in this particular case?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that i have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Post-coital posterior fornix perforation with vaginal evisceration
Version:3Date:27 September 2014
Reviewer: oskari heikinheimo
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting and well written case report. Also the figures are dramatic.
I only have few suggestions for a discretionary revisions.
Maybe the discussion concerning the possible etiologies of vaginal fornix injury
could be expanded with a sentence or two. (beginning of Discussion) I'm
personally aware of two cases caused by high water pressure, and one
associated with a neovagina).
Moreover, the authors might want to consider producing a table summering the
previously published cases of similar kind (which they have identified). That way
the article would provide also a brief review of literature.
Please spell out the abbreviations (PT, PTT etc).
Also, it would be of interest to know what kind of advice was provided to the
patient concerning when it would be safe to resume vaginal intercourse?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Subgrouping of Japanese middle-aged women using physical and
psychological symptom profiles: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:21 September 2014
Reviewer: DAVID VASQUEZ-AWAD
Reviewer's report:
No revisions by the autors
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I do not have competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Subgrouping of Japanese middle-aged women using physical and
psychological symptom profiles: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:10 October 2014
Reviewer: Santiago Palacios
Reviewer's report:
All the comments for the review of this manuscript are Major Compulsory
Revisions:
It is a work that tries to analyze perimenopausic and menopausic women
subgroups with different symptomatic profiles.
My major objection is that it is an study that does not represent to the Japanese
population of women from these ages since there were only analyzed those
women who goes to a menopausal clinic so that, they were symptomatic. It is
compulsory that this bias is indicated in the title of the study and, definitely, in the
methods. Therefore, my other comments are:
1) The Introduction must be longer and must indicate why it is interesting to
analyze these subgroups.
2) When it is defined the menopausal transition and menopause in the Methods
paragraph, it must be made clear the age when this diagnosis should be done
from. These concepts are incomplete.
3) In the Discussion paragraph, again, it must be indicated that these Japanese
women were already a symptomatic group of women going to a menopausal
clinic.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Reproductive health of women with and without disabilities in South India,
the SIDE Study (South India Disability Evidence) Study: A Case Control Study
Version:2Date:11 August 2014
Reviewer: Pat Doyle
Reviewer's report:
This study describes a case-control study of reproductive health in women with
and without disabilities in South India, building on an earlier study of the
prevalence of disability in the population. It is a novel study addressing an
important, and neglected, public health issue in India.
I have several comments on the paper, mostly relating to more technical aspects
of the case-control design.
Major Compulsory Revisions
Methods
1. I found the Methods section a little muddled. It would be useful to re-order the
text to clarify the definition and sources of cases, the definition and sources of
controls, data collection methods, and analysis.
2. The methods section had very little detail on the method of selection of the
controls. More detail is needed to be able to assess the likelihood (or not) of
selection bias.
3. The Statistical Analysis section is too brief. More needs to be added on the
method used for adjustment of potential confounding factors in logistic
regression. alos, was a power calculation done?
Results
4. Table 1. The vast majority of cases (72%) were described as “other” . More
detail is needed here- perhaps as grouped categories - as the reader has no idea
what type of disability is included.
5. Table 3. In the calculation of the mean number of births per woman and a
history of miscarriage, it appears that the denominator is the total number of
women (247 cases and 324 controls). This is incorrect. The denominator needs
to be the number of women with a history of one or more pregnancies. This may
change the conclusion that cases have more living children than controls.
6. Table 3. The way odds ratios have been presented in the table is
non-standard. The authors need to (i) include 95% confidence intervals, (ii)
provide a footnote to indicate what variables have been adjusted for in the
models, and (ii) consider presenting crude and adjusted OR for all the variables
in Table 4 (and leave out chi-square statistics) to make the table more readable.
Discussion
7. Reference to use of contraception by cases and controls is speculative and
should be mentioned more cautiously (and possibly changed considering the
denominator issue mentioned in point 4 above).
8. The limitations of the study should be mentioned, especially the low numbers
for some analyses and resulting low power to detect smaller differences.
Minor Essential Revisions
9. Page 6, Line 4. Take out “of a series”
10. Page 6 line 13. Replace “Study Methodology” with “Data Collection”
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that i have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Sexual violence in the lives of first-year university women in Canada: no
improvements in the 21st century
Version:2Date:5 August 2014
Reviewer: Kathryn Branch
Reviewer's report:
This research adds to the existing literature. Overall, this piece is well written and
you have some interesting findings. My specific comments (all minor essential
revisions) are listed below:
1. Is it possible to determine how many rape victims were raped during their
college experience? Did any questions ask this?
2. It might be useful to add some comments about Universities using a trauma
informed approach to education. Your research suggests that campuses should
consider a trauma informed approach because many of your participants
indicated coming into the college with traumatic experiences.
3. The discussion of the optimism bias is very interesting especially given that the
pattern was observed even for women who had been previously raped by men.
What do you think are the policy implications?
4. In your conclusion add more on the discussion of the use of drugs and alcohol.
For decades there has been a focus on the role of drugs and alcohol and yet
today you are still finding that it is an issue. What does this mean for current
college campus initiatives?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Sexual violence in the lives of first-year university women in Canada: no
improvements in the 21st century
Version:2Date:6 September 2014
Reviewer: Sue McKenzie-Mohr
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript.
The question posed by the authors is clearly defined and their rationale for
posing this particular question is strongly defended. The dearth of scholarship in
the past 25 years regarding the incidence of sexual violence on Canadian
campuses calls for our attention (particularly, given the stark statistics reported in
the 1990s). The research project summarized in this manuscript is a valuable
contribution toward rectifying this paucity of work. The title and abstract
accurately convey the focus and results of the study, and the style of writing is
clear, concise and accessible. The authors acknowledge and effectively build
upon the body of work in this area of study.
The methods are clearly outlined in adequate detail, and are appropriate given
the study’s aim. One element that was not mentioned (and which I would value in
the manuscript) has to do with whether any debriefing/support arrangements had
been put in place to prepare for the possibility of a participant experiencing
distress in response to questions posed in the Sexual Experiences Survey
(SES-SFV). This would be of value to know, particularly because many
participants had experienced forms of sexual violence and they may not have
expected the graphic nature and focus of these questions.
The authors have reported the data effectively, and their results are compelling.
The discussion and conclusions are fitting extensions of the results, and are
clearly supported by the data. A key focus of the Discussion section very
appropriately attends to implications for education and prevention efforts directed
at women entering university. And yet, I believe that at least a ‘nod’ to the need
for effective programming to support adolescent boys’ and young men’s
development into effective allies and to change society’s acceptance of
aggressive masculinity is worth noting.
Both of the small additions I recommend here I view as discretionary revisions.
Overall, I believe that this is an important and substantial contribution to the body
of work regarding sexual violence against women, and I strongly support it being
published.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Posttraumatic stress among women after induced abortion: a prospective,
longitudinal multi-centre study
Version: 1Date:16 October 2013
Reviewer: Gail Robinson
Reviewer's report:
Minor essential revisions:
1. How is it that lifetime prevalence of trauma decreased over the 6 mon
follow-up. Why should a lifetime prevalence of anything decrease over a 6 mon
period?Minor essential revisions:
1. How is it that lifetime prevalence of trauma decreased over the 6 month
follow-up. Why should a lifetime prevalence of anything decrease over a 6 month
period?
2. What were the traumas, either related to attendance at the abortion clinic, or
non-related? If the abortion occurred at home, how did these women have
trauma related to attendance at the clinic
3. This rational was expressed as a theory re women who dropped out
“ it can also be argued that women who develop PTSD or PTSS as a result of
their abortion care would be more inclined to report back to the clinic the trauma
experiences they had had as a consequence of the given care”. This doesn’t
make sense when one is looking at the characteristic of groups that got into
trouble as their pre-abortion characteristics are not dissimilar to those who drop
it.
4. there are several sentences whose meanings are very unlear:
a)
Swedish follow-up study (n=58) after induced abortion reported at four months 12
women that had been in a crisis, while at 12 months only two women still
expressed their feelings in relation to the abortion in terms of a crisis.
b) A
"Swedish follow-up study (n=58) after induced abortion reported at four months
12 women that had been in a crisis, while at 12 months only two women still
expressed their feelings in relation to the abortion in terms of a crisis.
b) Non-responsiveness at follow-up after induced abortion was considerable"
5) The main problem is the poor return rate., however, the authors make a
vaillant attempt to explain this an account for it.
6) this conclusion may not be valid, suffering people are probably the least likely
to report.: "it can also be argued that women who develop
PTSD or PTSS as a result of their abortion care would be more inclined to report
back to the clinic the trauma experiences they had had as a consequence of the
given care
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Posttraumatic stress among women after induced abortion: a prospective,
longitudinal multi-centre study
Version:1Date:22 October 2013
Reviewer: Nada Stotland
Reviewer's report:
This is a well-written report of a well-designed and well-executed study or
considerable scientific and policy interest. There are two issues which might be
commented upon, though there is probably no way the authors could actually
answer them, and the answers are not essential to the paper.
1--What was the nature of the trauma that occured to a few subjects at the time
of the abortion?
2--What was the nature of the psychosocial stressors that led the subjects to
desire pregnancy terminations?
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I am an author of one of the cited references, and I have testified on the topic in
courts and legislative bodies in the United States. However, I accept no payment
for these contributions. Therefore I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:A qualitative investigation of the impact of peer to peer online support for
women living with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Version: 1Date:28 July 2013
Reviewer: Jodie Avery
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to consider the experiences of women living with
Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome who access and participate in a online support
group discussion forum dedicated to issues surrounding this condition.
Minor Essential Revisions:
Abstract:
I would have liked to have seen the number of participants specified in the
abstract.
Background:
Well written summary of the current state of knowledge.
Methods:
A description of the interview schedule and how this was developed should be
included in the methodological description of this paper. Additionally, no
comment as to whether the sample size was adequate to answer this question is
included. It may be that 50 women was to large and no mention of theoretical
saturation was made.
Results:
It seemed after reading the results that one major theme that emerged from the
positive aspects of using an OSG should have been that of "Empowerment". For
example, the women were given confidence to better interact with health
professionals, they were given information to make better informed choices. This
is elucidated in the literature, but there is little mention of it here.
Discussion:
The limitations of the study should be included here. Another limitation of this
study is that the women included were already pro active about their health, and
this is why they joined the forum. The were already "help seekers" in some form
and this may bias results.
The number of participants in this study is totally adequate for a qualitative study,
particularly if theoretical saturation is achieved. It would be better to verify the
results of this study using a larger sample and quantitative methods, with
questions informed by the results of this study. Additionally a different recruitment
source of women with PCOS could be used such as members of a support group
not based on online activities, thus non users could be included.
Conclusion:
Are there any further implications of this research and what advice to policy
makers do you have?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare I have no competing interests.