JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 01 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
Many thanks for inviting me to review this manuscript. I read this paper carefully. The article
highlighted efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder in China. I feel the research topic is interesting and the article appear
well-written and well-referenced. However, I have a few small suggestions to improve the
quality of the article.
In the abstact section, all verbs should be in past tense. In this section, the conclusion should
also be briefly included the practical implications of the study, followed by recommendations
for future studies.
Moreover, there are minor concerns regarding English grammar, expression, and acronyms. So,
I strongly recommend that the paper be checked by a native English speaker or professional
English editing service before re-submission.
Title: Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 05 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
I read Your article entitled “Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the
management of placenta accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study”.
Placenta accreta spectrum disorder (PAS) is a serious obstetric complication that requires
attention and investigation. The increasing incidence of the disorder, linked to rising rates
of cesarean sections and assisted reproductive techniques, underscores the importance of
understanding and addressing this issue. Research in this area could potentially lead to
advancements in obstetric care, aiding in the development of better screening methods, early
detection, and effective interventions.
I have the following advice for the Author,
• What do you mean for “two-child” and “three child” policies? This policies belongs to the
specific socio-cultural setting of China;
• At line 99 replace the word “etc” with other examples, if possible;
• At line 115 the word “experienced ultrasound experts” is a repetition, change with “ultrasound
experts”;
• At line 135 You should explain better the meaning of placental invasion classification as area
S1 and area S2, otherwise the reader cannot understand what You are referring to;
• In “PBO procedure and operative management” section You should specify how long before
the cesarean section the patient has to undergo the PBO procedure;
• At line 152 You say “After the operation, the balloon catheter was removed”: how much time
after the operation? Please specify
• Line 154: why did the lower limbs needed to be immobilized for 24 hours? Add reference
or explain;
• The PBO group had a higher proportion of patients with an MRI with S2 invasion and had
more severe types of PAS; these differences between PBO group and control group, as You
said at line 212-213, affect the results (EBL, operation time, massive hemorrhage, hysterectomy
rate). I suggest to add this aspect in the “Strengths and limitations” section;
• At line 196-197 You say that some patients developed thrombosis, were they doing thrombotic
prophylaxis with heparin? How long after the C-section they experienced thrombosis?
The study aims to investigate the effectiveness of prophylactic balloon occlusion (PBO) in the
management of placenta accreta spectrum disorder. While the study is well-structured and the
tables effectively present the data, the article needs to be fixed in the aforementioned parts before
publication.
Additionally, the literature review highlights the existence of numerous articles, systematic
reviews, and meta-analyses on this topic, revealing controversial results regarding the use of
PBO. Considering this, I recommend modifying the title to better reflect the scope of the study
and its findings.
Title: Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 06 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Imane Boujguenna
Reviewer's report:
"Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta accreta
spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study" The study titled "Efficacy and safety of
prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta accreta spectrum disorder: a
retrospective cohort study" provides valuable insights into the management of a complex
obstetric complication, placenta accreta spectrum disorder (PAS). Strengths:
1. Rigorous analysis: The study employs a robust retrospective cohort design, analyzing data
from a sizable sample of PAS patients undergoing cesarean delivery.
2. Comprehensive assessment: The researchers thoroughly examine various outcomes, including
intraoperative and postoperative parameters, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and PBO-related
complications.
3. Clinically relevant findings: The study's results highlight the potential benefits of prophylactic
balloon occlusion (PBO) in reducing the risk of massive hemorrhage in PAS patients undergoing
cesarean section. This finding holds significant clinical implications for obstetric practice, where
managing hemorrhage is a critical concern. Moreover, the study provides valuable insights into
identifying high-risk PAS patients who may benefit from PBO intervention. By considering
factors such as MRI findings and PAS grade, clinicians can make more informed decisions
regarding the use of PBO, thereby improving patient outcomes. Overall, this study contributes
to the growing body of literature on PAS management by providing evidence of the efficacy
and safety of PBO intervention. Obstetricians and healthcare providers can use these findings
to inform clinical decision-making and optimize patient care in cases of PAS. Further research,
including prospective studies and multicenter trials, may help corroborate these findings and
enhance their generalizability.
In conclusion, the study's findings underscore the potential of PBO as a valuable tool in
managing PAS and emphasize the importance of individualized patient care in obstetrics.
Title: Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 11 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
Please explain the words in full before using abbreviations.
OR, CI, MRI?
Please, considering the existence of numerous studies in this field, please explain what gap in
the literature review this study is supposed to answer.
What is the formula for determining sample size?
Simple ultrasound and MRI cannot be an effective help in diagnosing accreta, was Doppler done
before the study for the patients?
Were all procedures performed by one person?
What does surgery type mean?
Title: Efficacy and safety of prophylactic balloon occlusion in the management of placenta
accreta spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 22 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
I read the submitted manuscript with great interest. The study design and methods were
sufficiently described. Can you explain why the inclusion criteria included delivery < 28 weeks?
In my opinion, the selection of the study group should be described in more detail. There is
no information on how many cases of PAS were identified before the exclusion criteria were
applied.
I suggest describing the selection of the study group using a diagram.
Title: Patients’ recommendations to improve help-seeking for vaginismus: A qualitative study
Version: 0 Date: 02 Oct 2023
Reviewer:  Andréa Cronemberger Rufino
Reviewer's report:
I congratulate the authors for the quality and originality of the article. Current and necessary
topic of deconstruction of the androcentric and vertical perspective in female sexual health care.
In the summary, I suggest changing the order of the paragraphs in Backgroud to make the text
clearer. Place the 1st paragraph after the second. This way:
“Research to improve healthcare experiences for women with vaginismus tends to be produced
from the perspective of healthcare professionals or health-based researchers. There is lacking
research on women’s experiences and recommendations to improve help-seeking for vaginismus
from their perspective.”
Methods were described impeccably and without doubt.
Results presented the perspective of women with symptoms of vaginismus and the discussion
and conclusion highlighted the benefits when women are protagonists of their sexuality and
health care.
Title: Patients’ recommendations to improve help-seeking for vaginismus: A qualitative study
Version: 0 Date: 10 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
I enjoyed reading this paper. It was interesting and generally well-written. Furthermore, the use
of the feminist approach was well thought out and effective. This paper has important critical
findings on ways to improve help-seeking for vaginismus. However, I observed some minor
points:
The title is clear and well thought out. It stated clearly that the study is qualitative. The abstract
is clear. The introduction is too long but reads well. The theoretical background is stated.
The results section was fine and generally rooted in the data. It is also well-detailed with
verbatims. The themes were well explained.
The discussion compares and contrasts findings with what is in the literature.
Are there any implications for practice?
The conclusion is well stated. It summarizes the points developed.
The references:
-Updated references were shown. However:
-Check page 7 line 154, date in the text.
-Journal names should be in short form as you used the Vancouver style.
Overall well done!
All the best.
Title: Patients’ recommendations to improve help-seeking for vaginismus: A qualitative study
Version: 1 Date: 14 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Andréa Cronemberger Rufino
Reviewer's report:
I congratulate the authors for the quality of the research carried out. Investigating vaginismus
from women's perspective is central to improving care for them. This article offers invaluable
data for promoting public policies on sexuality education.
Title: Women Alone Modern Contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence
from PMA CS 2021 Survey
Version: 2 Date: 13 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. Though an important topic, there are several
issues the authors should address before the paper can be considered for publication.
Comments and Suggestions.
I strongly recommend that the paper receives brushing up by a professional proofreading. There
are several grammatical mistakes, inappropriate use of words/phrases, and inaccurate sentences
In the abstract section background is too many, reduce it. Remove Lines 26 -29.
Your abstract should minimize its size hence you should follow journal guidelines.
The methods part was too detailed and long, better to rewrite the main ideas and what you wanted
to do.
Your recommendation is also too long, please evoke specific bodies.
Title: Women Alone Modern Contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence
from PMA CS 2021 Survey
Version: 2 Date: 15 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
Comments
I would like to thanks the journal for giving this chance to review an interesting topic entitled
”Women Alone Modern Contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence from
PMA CS 2021 Survey”.
General comments
The manuscript was well written and very important to increases the uptake of the contraception
and in turn to reduce maternal mortality. However, there are a lot of inconsistencies throughout
the documents.
Specific comments
Abstract
Line 43: remove “logistic” its repetition.
Line 47-49: the two sentences are not clear. What does mean about “This study revealed that one
in two women (59.49%; 95% CI:  57.7%-61.4%) decide their contraceptive use by themselves.
What is more interesting is that 1 in 20 women (6.06%) reported that others decided their
contraceptive use”. The two sentences are contradicts with each other (1 in 2 and 1 in 20 women).
Line 50: write “2.51 (1.04, 4.45)” as (AOR: 2.51 (95%CI: 1.04, 4.45)). Make it to all.
Line 59: the authors should make the result and conclusion section consistent. The result section
says “one in two women decide by themselves but the conclusion section says one two in three”
Line 62-68: please write the possible direction and activities to improve the women alone
decision making rather than repeating the result.
Introduction
General comments on the introduction section:  how did the author relates women alone decision
making on contraceptive use with shared decision making i.e. women and husband or sexual
partner? Which one is the preferred one? What would be the authors’ recommendation?
Line 76-81: add references.
Line 116-123: please, rewrite the paragraph.
Methods and material
Line 124: write the “methods” as methods and materials
Would write about PMA in detail?
Line 130: what does mean “…..living together with a partner….”?
Line 139-140: incomplete sentence
Line167: would add reference?
Line 181: what does mean about “…..contraceptive mass to mass media exposure…”
Line 183-187: would explain more about how did the authors’ measure contraceptive
knowledge?
Would add references for “forced pregnancy, contraceptive mass to mass media exposure, and
contraceptive knowledge”?
Line 201: would edit “association” as relationship.
Title: Women Alone Modern Contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence
from PMA CS 2021 Survey
Version: 4 Date: 22 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments
Thank you for giving a chance to review a revised manuscript entitled “Women Alone Modern
Contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence from PMA CS 2021 Survey”.
The authors have addressed majority of the comments however there are still some concerns
that needs revision.
Abstract:
Line 43: Please, would make decimal consistent?  For example (59.49%; 95% CI:  57.7%-61.4%)
Discussion
Line 295-303: would compare and contrast this study finding with studies that had similar
outcome measurements?
Please, in addition to writing the possible reason for the difference and similarity with other
studies, would add the possible implication of the findings?
Conclusion:
Would make a conclusion short?
Title: OUTCOMES OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADICAL
HYSTERECTOMY FOR LOCALLY ADVANCED CERVICAL CANCER AT KIGALI
UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL, RWANDA: A RETROSPECTIVE DESCRIPTIVE
STUDY
Version: 1 Date: 19 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Vincent Degennaro
Reviewer's report:
Your study is great and a step forward. Please take my comments as constructive for your study
and the clinical pathway it creates. But I think we do a disservice by not talking about the failures
of the Global North to have guidelines that reflect reality in Global South, or failure of Global
South to come up with guidelines that fit their reality.
You refer over and over again to guidelines that condemn those with treatable cancer (Stage
IIB, III) to die. These are the guidelines that your study is attempting to subvert and more info
would paint a starker picture. You mention how many were referred for CRT within the study.
But how many were referred to CRT of all comers (Stage Ib-IV)? I don’t think you need to
provide a mortality breakdown necessarily because that’s outside the scope of this paper. But
to be  honest about this study being a small proportion of total patients received will help paint
a fuller picture. And perhaps convince those at CHUK, Butaro and PIH to pursue NACT-S for
those with IIB and III as standard of care, since most of those “referred” to CRT don’t actually
get CRT and simply die with no intervention. We have had significant success (50% two year
mortality, down from 100%) in treating Stage IIB and III with NACT-S. We give 4 cycles of
chemo as our standard prior to evaluation for surgery and give at least 6 prior to saying that
chemo has failed to make them operable.
Page 3, line 85: From this study: Only 25-30% would require CRT post NACT-S. if we’re going
to comment that it doesn’t improve survival, I think its important to contextualize that only a
minority benefit from CRT vs NACT-S.
Page 7, line 168: So 14 were not responsive and referred to CRT? How many actually got it?
Do we have any results for them? If 25% were not responsive, why not give more chemo?
Table 1: Hgb: I’d consider using 10g as the cutoff as that’s clinically significant for those
undergoing surgery. Minor point.
Page 10, line 209: Do we know their starting stage prior to NACT-S?
Page 10, line 213: What is starting point? Post diagnosis, post recurrence or post op?
Page 13, line 265: We can temporize by giving chemo while they wait.
Page 13, line 271: However, these guidelines written in US and Europe fall short where?
Discussion is a good place to raise these issues.
Page 14, line 279:  We must mention that they have access to CRT, which is not an option in
most of africa.
Limitations: ALL of your limitations are strengths. They are real world application.
Page 17, line 348: Although not YET considered standard of care...
Title: OUTCOMES OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADICAL
HYSTERECTOMY FOR LOCALLY ADVANCED CERVICAL CANCER AT KIGALI
UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL, RWANDA: A RETROSPECTIVE DESCRIPTIVE
STUDY
Version: 3 Date: 07 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
Edits/revision addressed all points raised in the initial review.
Just noted one exclusion. Under the results section you have IIA-3 patients. It should be IIA1-
patients.
Title: OUTCOMES OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADICAL
HYSTERECTOMY FOR LOCALLY ADVANCED CERVICAL CANCER AT KIGALI
UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL, RWANDA: A RETROSPECTIVE DESCRIPTIVE
STUDY
Version: 3 Date: 12 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Vincent Degennaro
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for addressing all of my concerns. Great work and great paper.
Title: Effects of hysteroscopic septum incision versus expectant management on IVF outcomes
in women with complete septate uterus: A retrospective study
Version: 0 Date: 21 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript provides valuable insights into the impact of hysteroscopic septum incision on
IVF outcomes in a specific population.
Introduction: This section is well-structured, starting from the broad topic and narrowing to the
objectives of the manuscript. However, more detailed definition of the septated uterus should
be provided according to ESHRE/ESGE/ASRM classifications.  The manuscript has a clear and
specific objective, which is to assess the impact of hysteroscopic septum incision on in vitro
fertilization (IVF) outcomes in infertile women with a complete septate uterus and no history
of recurrent pregnancy loss.
Methods: The manuscript provides a detailed description of the study design, patient
recruitment, inclusion and exclusion criteria, diagnosis of uterine anomalies, hysteroscopic
uterine septum incision procedure, and outcome measures. This allows for transparency and
reproducibility. However, the study acknowledges the limitation of a relatively small sample
size. This may affect the generalizability of the findings, and the larger, well-designed
randomized trials in the future can be beneficial.
Ethical Considerations: The study received approval from the ethical committee, and informed
consent was obtained from all participants. This demonstrates a commitment to ethical research
practices.
Comprehensive Data Analysis: The statistical analysis is detailed, covering various outcome
measures and adjusting for relevant variables such as age, BMI, baseline FSH levels, number of
embryos transferred, and endometrial thickness. Subgroup analyses are also conducted.
On the oehtr hand, the retrospective design introduces inherent biases and limitations. Selection
bias, changes in surgical techniques over time, and incomplete documentation of obstetrical
outcomes are acknowledged concerns.
Discussion: The discussion section interprets the study's findings, comparing them to existing
literature. While the study discusses conflicting results among previous studies, a more in-depth
discussion on why these discrepancies might exist could strengthen the manuscript. The authors
acknowledge the limitations and implications of their results.
Some sentences could be revised for clarity, and there are a few grammatical and typographical
errors (e.g., "first and mild trimester" should probably be "first and mid-trimester").
Overall, the manuscript provides a foundation for further research in this area, emphasizing the
need for larger, well-designed randomized trials to strengthen the evidence base. With careful
consideration of the identified limitations and potential for further research, this manuscript
could be a meaningful contribution to the scientific literature in the field.
Title: Effects of hysteroscopic septum incision versus expectant management on IVF outcomes
in women with complete septate uterus: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 18 Jan 2024
Reviewer:  Adrian Shulman
Reviewer's report:
The article by Jiajia Zhang and colleagues retrospectively analyzes the results of IVF treatments
in a population of women with a septate uterus. Among fertility specialists and gynecologists
in general, this is a hot topic and a continuously debated issue. Therefore, the question of the
research and the research itself is desirable. A prospective, multicenter, d randomized study was
recently published. It is suggested that the authors should refer to this article (HR, 2021)
The two biggest problems with the present study:
They were, first, related to the bias of case selection. How were the patients who underwent
resection of the septum selected compared to those who did not? It is unclear what was offered
to everyone. Everyone has proposed an operation, and only some agreed, or the doctors made
the selection in advance, and in this case, we should receive the criteria.
Second, it is in the field of accounting. The numbers do not add up:
In the cases of the surgical group, the text says that the 60 embryo transfer cycles involved 22
(36.7%) fresh embryo transfer cycles and 36 (63.3%) frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. (22
plus 36 = 58?? not 60).
In Table 3, the same (that underwent resection of the septum) reported 60 cycles: 26 clinical
pregnancies, eight abortions, 16 ongoing, and 15 deliveries. The connections do not match.
In the text regarding the same group: 26 clinical pregnancies, eight abortions in the first trimester,
two ectopic pregnancies, and 16 births
We observe differences between the text and the table for the same group.
Group without surgery:
In the table, there were 36 clinical pregnancies, eight abortions in the first trimester, 28 ongoing
pregnancies, and 19 births.
In the text regarding the same group: 36 clinical pregnancies, eight abortions in the first trimester,
three ectopic pregnancies, and 19 births. There is no match between the text and the table, and
the connections do not align.
Another point: regarding complications of the procedure? Are not mentioned.
In addition, the entire section related to the IVF process (ovarian stimulation, OPU, ET, and
FET,....) is unnecessary to many small subgroups with small numbers that contribute nothing
to the article, just writing volume.