Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: A cross -sectional evaluation of HIV testing practices among women in the rural 
Dominican Republic  
 
Version: 3 Date: 04 Nov 2019  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:  
 
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several 
testable research questions? (Brief or other article typ es: is there a clear objective?)  
 
Yes - there is a clear objective  
 
 
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for the 
objective?  
 
No - there are minor issues  
 
 
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses perform ed with sufficient technical rigor to 
allow confidence in the results?  
 
No - there are minor issues  
 
 
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?  
 
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study  
 
 
INTERPRETATION - Is the current  interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not 
overstated?  
 
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable  
 
 
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently 
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further 
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?  
 
Probably - with minor revisions  
 
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors of the manuscript evaluated HIV testing practices among 
women in the rural Dominican Republic. This is an important exploratory study, addressing an 
important area for HIV test and test policy. The study methods were described  in the detail to 
allow for replication. The important study limitation, i.e. small sample size was acknowledged.  
 
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
 
1. The authors should consider using STROBE checklist for reporting the manuscript to 
improve the readability. In addit ion, there is a need to add sub -headings to improve of the 
manuscript.  
 
2. How were variables added to the multivariable model selected? Were all variables 
included in the univariable models included in the multivariable model? Was there a p -
value cut -off for including variables in the multivariable model?  
 
3. Table 2: consider reporting confidence intervals for the IRR for the univariable models.  
 
4. Table 2: consider reporting only aIRR and corresponding 95% CI for the adjusted model.  
 
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SU GGESTIONS:  
 
The authors have satisfactorily responded to all initial comments.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls a re 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 speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
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 financial ly from the 
publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2.  Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or 
lose financi ally 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 organiz ation 
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 th e above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with  
declared or apparent competing interest s are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified t imeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepte d 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.or g/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editor s, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal