Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Tailoring Communications to the Evolving Needs of Patients Throughout the Cancer Care 
Trajectory: A Qualitative Exploration With Breast Cancer Patients  
 
 
Version: 0 Date: 22 Aug 2016  
 
 
Reviewer: Paulina  Villaseca  
 
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
 
This is a nice careful qualitative study on doctor -patient communication in breast cancer  women.  
 
The profound evaluation performed in the continuum of cancer management, from diagnosis on, 
makes this a good and important contribution for better care of cancer patients, (in spite of the 
small sample).  
 
I suggest minor corrections:  
 
Key words:  
 
Breast cancer, doctor -patient communication, doctor -patient empathy,... and maybe Consultation 
timing.  
 
Abstract:  
 
The results should include the main findings: the lack of chance for the patients to discuss their 
needs on both medical and psychological i ssues, the distress of the feeling of having a short 
consultation time, the need of a possibility of having other opportunities to discuss their 
questions, etc. The conclusions should also address, shortly, to the insufficient care as seen from 
the patient s view.  
 
Text:  
 
The first sentence in the Conclusions should be moved to the Discussion.  
 
Conclusions: Abbreviate, go to the main messages related to the findings.  
 
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.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
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 futu re? 
 
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 Acc ess 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