JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Self-assessment of attitudes towards conditions to provide safe abortion among new
medical graduates in Thailand, 2018: an application of cross-sectional survey with factor
analysis
Version: 3 Date: 22 Jun 2021
Reviewer's report:
I have few suggestions for revision.
1. Background (line 93-95): "Further, the new regulation of the TMC stipulates that all new
medical graduates must be able to perform manual vacuum aspiration (MVA), whereas the prior
regulation specified sharp curettage as a minimal requirement9." --> Please explain what MVA
and sharp curetteage are used for, to be understandable by general audience.
2.  Background (line 108): "... that a lack of training and drug supplies as well as  "insufficient
reasons"  for abortion were the main cause ..." --> I believe there is other phrase more appropriate
than the phrase "insufficient reasons" for this context.
3. Background (line 121): "Another study was carried out in ,.  The study ..." --> The place is
missing.
4. Method (line 166): "The questionnaire was developed by employing the 2003 survey  of the
Department of Health (DOH), MOPH, Thailand. " --> Please indicate the name of the survey.
5. Discussion (line 303-306): "We hope that findings from this study will be helpful for academic
and policy makers in the field to revise the curricula for both normal track and CPIRD students
and better prepare the working environment for new medical graduates to perform safe abortions
in suitable conditions." --> This should be at the end of the discussion session and the claim that
it can help revise the MD curriculum should be related to what has been discussed earlier in text.
Title: Women’s decision-making power in a context of free reproductive healthcare and family
planning in rural Burkina Faso
Version: 2 Date: 15 May 2021
Reviewer:  Maurice Ye
Reviewer's report:
Thanks to the authors for this innovative research on value added on user fees removal and
improvement of access to reproductive health and family planning service. This without doubt
will contribute to shed light on persisting gaps for better policy planning.
Overall the manuscript is well structured and follows the standard requirement according to
BMC reproductive guideline.
Reviewer comments
Abstract is very concise and summarized key information about user fees exemption, effects of
reproductive health care, family planning services uptake. Finding from quality content analysis
highlighted key achievements and gaps in women empowerment for better decision in health
seeking processes. However, authors could take care of the following:
Background section:
In row 7: could you please specify whether the user fees exemption policy also include
emergency transportation to reach health centers, particularly for women in need of emergency
care?. Geographical barrier was very often pointed out as limiting factors in Burkina Faso.
Row 74: Is there any available updated data related to maternal and child death progress made so
far since the introduction user fees exemption in 2016 to date? This will also ensure that Burkina
Faso is in track towards sustainable development goals achievements. Please add if any.
Methods section:
This is well structured qualitative research method that used both semi-structed interview and
focus group discussion.
The author mentioned pre-testing of the tools, it may be good to talk about the setting of the
pre-testing, and involved participants.
Data collection: as in data analysis section, i would suggest adding in data collection section that
interviews and focus group discussions were recorded by interviewers.
Ethics consideration: This is a good approach for good practice in conduction research that
include human being opinions.
Results section:
Using thematic/content analysis was much appreciation with a mix of quotes from various
participants in the results section provide better understanding of beneficiaries and key
informants perspectives.
Row 263: Please correct the figure number. It should be figure 2 instead of 1 according to
annexes.
References section:
- Row 550, reference 1: please add url, and access date
- Row 565: reference 7: please add url: http://www.help-ev.de/en/projects/burkinafaso/ (ONG
HELP) et http://www.equitesante.org/helpburkina/.
Figures section: Burkina Faso map: please add Legend. In addition, study sites and main cities
should be in different colors to avoid confusion.
Title: Women’s decision-making power in a context of free reproductive healthcare and family
planning in rural Burkina Faso
Version: 2 Date: 20 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
This a well-written manuscript and the authors applied an appropriate study design. The author
deserves credit to explore such an important aspect that affects the access and utilization of
reproductive healthcare and family planning services. However, I have given a minor review
before take this into publication.
The sample size was determined according to the principle of data saturation (Line 126). The
term ‘data saturation’ is widely used in qualitative research, which needs further clarity. It
will be beneficial if the author describes the data saturation process—how the saturation was
conceptualized and operationalized?
Furthermore, did the author triangulate information from various participants/methods in
reaching the point of data redundancy? A bit detailed description will be helpful to enrich the
method section.
In line 520-21, the author wrote ‘TD is an FRQS Junior 1 Research Scholar’, which seems
irrelevant. I would suggest checking the text.
Title: Women’s decision-making power in a context of free reproductive healthcare and family
planning in rural Burkina Faso
Version: 4 Date: 11 Jun 2021
Reviewer:  Maurice Ye
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for taking time to provide point-by point responses to my queries.
I am particularly satisfy with the fact that  fuel for medical evacuations is part of user fees
exemption package and this is a good point to ensure equitable access to health service and
removal of potential barriers that can limit access to health services.
The precisions provided on questionnaire pre-testing and consideration of some suggested
references improved the understanding from reader perspective.
Title: Health and suffering are associated with social support – a cross-sectional study of women
and mothers with exhaustion and pain
Version: 1 Date: 20 May 2021
Reviewer:  Rafaella Queiroga Souto
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations on your choice of theme. Mothers are even overburdened and neglected by
society and the scientific academy.
I would like to make some comments and suggestions in order to improve the quality of the
material presented.
- Among these women undergoing rehabilitation for long-lasting pain and exhaustion, were all
mothers? This is not clear in the text.
- In the summary, the division of the samples was not clear. Did you have three samples? That?
- Line 22, p. 4 - correct verbal agreement
- Line 15, p. 5 - there are two spaces between "a lack"
- Line 18, p. 5 - a comma was missing after "studies"
- Line 1, p. 6 - the objective is different from the objective of the abstract. Standardize.
- Reading the methodology, the division of the samples is clear but it is not really clear in the
summary.
- Tables should not have lines on the sides or inside. If it is the magazine's norm, that's fine. But
if not, I suggest correcting it.
- Line 1, p. 12 - placing children in the singular;
- The first paragraph on page 12 should be before table 1
- The second paragraph on page 12 refers to which table? It should come before her.
- For all tables, the authors must describe the main results before presenting them, and the table
must always be cited.
- Line 13, p. 14 - insert table?
- In the limitations, the authors do not need to start with the positive points of the study. This
can be said at the conclusion.
- Still regarding the limitations, the fact of not having a causal relationship is a characteristic of
cross-sectional studies and not a limitation.
- I suggest sending the article for an English language review. I found some errors, but a qualified
professional can find others.
- I think the text itself could have been very summarized, but if the magazine accepts that amount
of pages, that's fine.
- I really liked the research in general. It brought results that can really help in professional
practice.
I believe that the manuscript has the potential to be published in this journal.
Title: Predictors of contraceptive method discontinuation among adolescent and young women
in three West African countries (Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger)
Version: 1 Date: 27 Dec 2020
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Several informations are necessary to make the manuscript clearer.
Abstract: The conclusion could directly respond to the objective. The results could to have
numbers.
The introduction needs to be revised. There is a paragraph that is long and the other refers to
the objective.
For me, the information is not clear: “It is defined as the duration of exposure or difference
between the month of first use and the month of last use.” ; “For women who had no
discontinuation episodes during the observation period, the most recent episode of continued
use was considered.” and “Only those episodes that began during the calendar period and were
completed within 3 months prior to the interview were included. According to the literature,
the three months immediately preceding the interview were excluded to avoid underestimating
contraceptive failure by avoiding possible pregnancies [25]. A woman may report several
episodes of contraceptive use in the DHS schedule. All episodes of contraceptive method use
during the five-year observation period were included in the calculation of the drop-out rate, so
that the unit of analysis was the 3-62-month episode of contraceptive method use ”.
In the methods section, in the topic “Factors Associated with Discontinuation of Contraceptive
Methods”, I suggest that not use topics.
If you choose to keep the analysis univariate, describe it in the static analysis.
Explain the adjusted HR for which variables. To add in the method section.
There are paragraphs in the discussion that have no reference.
Still in the discussion, I miss comparisons with other similar studies showing HR values as well
as general findings.
There is an issue that needs to be discussed:  contraceptive method is generalized or categorized
by type. I would like to know from the authors if the specification of the method becomes
relevant.
In the table, justify using the presentation of age as the most prevalent (20 - 24)
Table 3 lacks the explanation for the symbol #
It´s necessary to review the initials.
Title: Predictors of contraceptive method discontinuation among adolescent and young women
in three West African countries (Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger)
Version: 3 Date: 03 Mar 2021
Reviewer's report:
The considerations improved the understanding of the study. I still have minor adjustments to
improve the manuscript. Considerations are listed below
1) Throughout the text, adolescents have been approached more clearly. It is necessary to
review the text, including the abstract and standardize the writing: it will always be focused on
adolescents and young people or just young people.
2) Check line 183: variable v005
3) Try to summarize the data analysis.
Title: Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with late stage cervical cancer diagnosis
in Botswana
Version: 2 Date: 22 Mar 2021
Reviewer's report:
The publication importantly contributes to identification of factors associated with late-stage
cervical cancer. Analyzed data is well researched, prepared and presented. The research is
comprehensive and considers all important issues that interest both Gynecologists as well as
Public Health specialists. I have read this work with great interest and see no objections to its
publication after minor adjustments are made. This work is certainly helpful for all those who
will make future strategies for late stage cervical cancer prevention in low and middle income
countries to further lower its incidence. I congratulate the authors.
Title: Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with late stage cervical cancer diagnosis
in Botswana
Version: 2 Date: 22 Mar 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this very interesting manuscript.
General:
• Please correct the references in the text. The brackets with numbers should be placed before
the punctuation mark and not vice versa.
• The manuscript needs some minor grammar editing.
• In methods, you stated that women were administered questionnaires after consenting, but in
discussion (lines 365-367), you wrote that you were not able to account for some confounders
due to retrospective nature of the study. This is contradictory, please explain.
Methods:
• Line 148: Number of excluded patients should be written in results, not in methods. The same
applies for the data regarding the missing values (lines 172-174).
Results:
• In the beginning of results, please state: how many women were eligible for the study, how
many agreed and how many were excluded.
Tables:
• Table 1: FIGO stage and pathology are not risk factors – either do not include them in this
table or rename this column. Next, you can not put range in the same column as percentages
(see variable Age). Same applies for Table 4.
• Table 3: There is no need for a special row “Rural”, since you already declare it in the table
caption.
Title: Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with late stage cervical cancer diagnosis
in Botswana
Version: 5 Date: 25 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you again for the opportunity to review this manuscript. I have one minor concern: in
row 245 you state that four hundred twenty women were diagnosed with late stage carcinoma,
which is contradictory to the 440 patients mentioned in Table 1. Please clarify it.
Title: Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with late stage cervical cancer diagnosis
in Botswana
Version: 5 Date: 28 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors have answered all the questions and made the necessary changes to the manuscript.
There are still some minor grammar issues and some double spaces throughout the text. There
are also spaces missing before the reference brackets.
Please correct Table 3 – the title is Visit with a traditional healer in a rural setting in women
with late-stage cervical cancer, but both early and late stage can be found in it.
Title: Impact of surgery on quality of life of Ugandan women with symptomatic pelvic organ
prolapse: a prospective cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 12 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Matteo Frigerio
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this interesting paper about the role of surgery for
pelvic organ prolapse managemente in low income countries. I think the topic is very interesting,
has the population of study is very peculiar in terms of job and obstetric history, compared
to high income countries, and this can potentially lead to very differnt outcomes of surgical
management.  I have few suggestion to improve the paper, and a concern about recurrence rate
evaluation.
English can be improved, and typos should be corrected.
Introduction:
-clearly introduce the topic, describe the environment and explain the rationale for the study.
Methods:
-informations on period of study are duplicated
-info on preoperative workup, surgery and follow-up are a little mixed up. Please consider gather
together all info on preop, then surgery, then follow-up. For instance is unclear to me if phone
calls were made before preop visits, postop visits, or both
-power calculation seems a post-hoc to me. Please specify.
Results
-table 1 is unreadable in the provided file.
-i would not list relapse as complication. However i was questioning how was recurrence defined
and evaluated considering the telephonic follow-up (if i have understand)
Discussion
-Discussion can be improved; please provide references and talk about reference studies “ This
is similar to findings from high income countries where women with POP had a poor QOL”.
-References
-please report references' number in the text
Title: Impact of surgery on quality of life of Ugandan women with symptomatic pelvic organ
prolapse: a prospective cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 15 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript, which falls within the aim of this Journal. In my honest
opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. Nevertheless, authors
should clarify some points and improve the discussion, as suggested below.
Authors should consider the following recommendations:
- Manuscript should be further revised in order to correct some typos and improve style.
- Although several approaches are able for the management of POP, the best strategy in case
of recurrence after vaginal vault prolapse still remains debated. I would discuss the available
evidence about novel techniques, referring to: PMID: 29675427; PMID: 29038834.
- Accumulating lines of evidence already highlighted that POP has a severe impact on quality
of life and may lead to a significant impairment of sexual functions; for this reason, a
multidisciplinary approach is recommended for accurate management. I would stress this point,
discussing some key articles: PMID: 28589780; PMID: 28584614.
Title: Menopausal symptoms are associated with oral sensory complaints in perimenopausal
women: An observational study
Version: 3 Date: 05 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
1) In the Methods section, QoL should be desribed in a separate subsection instead of
Supplementary, the same for menopausal symptoms.
2) In Statistical analysis, line 20, chi-square test does not require normal distribution, normal
distribution is only for numerical data, not categorical.
3) The Results section could be divided into some subsection, Table 2 is not interpreted enough.
4) In table 1, in the first column, first page, the last line "Xerostomia" and in column after total
also "Xerostomia", the same for Taste disturbance,and Burning mouth - is it correct?
Title: Menopausal symptoms are associated with oral sensory complaints in perimenopausal
women: An observational study
Version: 5 Date: 25 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
1) In Table 2 plural should be used: "symptoms"
2) Supplementary Table 1 is not needed, better to describe what characteristis were collected in
the main text in Methods section
3) Supplementary Table 2 is not needed, better to describe what menopausal symptoms were
asked. Is it common used scale for example Kupperman index or Green scale or authors own
prepared scale?
4) SF-36 should be described in the Methods section
5) Section "Questionairres" should be divided into subsections: Menopausal symptoms, SF-36
etc.
6) Results should be divided into subsections but not Table 1 and Table 2, rather: Oral sensory
complains and characteristics,  Oral sensory complains and menopausal symptoms, Oral sensory
complains and QoL etc.
7) In Abstract, in Methods, SF-36 should be listed.
Title: Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, in
women with endometriosis-associated pain: phase 2 safety and efficacy 24-week results
Version: 3 Date: 14 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Erdinç Sar#do#an
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
I strongly recommend of accepting this high-quality article. However, in my opinion, it would
be better that “study population” is presented in methods section.
Sincerely.
Title: Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, in
women with endometriosis-associated pain: phase 2 safety and efficacy 24-week results
Version: 3 Date: 22 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
I evaluated the manuscript and I think it is a very elaborate and carefully prepared study and
will contribute to the literature. In my opinion this manuscript is appropriate for publication in
this journal.
Kind regards
Title: Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, in
women with endometriosis-associated pain: phase 2 safety and efficacy 24-week results
Version: 5 Date: 07 Jun 2021
Reviewer:  Erdinç Sar#do#an
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors made a revision in accordance with my recommendation. Moreover, I
congratulate for this high-quality work.
Sincerely.
Title: Modeling spatial determinates of teenage pregnancy in Ethiopia; geographically weighted
regression
Version: 4 Date: 18 Mar 2021
Reviewer:  Samual Adjorlolo
Reviewer's report:
The problem statement did not stand out clearly and so was the justification or rationale for the
study.
Language problem interfered with the readability of the manuscript.
The method section should be described into detail.
Given the limitations of OLS in this context, one wonders why the authors conducted OLS?
The presentation of the result is poor and should be improved.
A plausible limitation of the study is ecological fallacy. The authors should consider this.
Title: Significance of serum and pathological biomarkers in fertility- sparing treatment for
endometrial cancer or atypical hyperplasia: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors performed a retrospective analysis of EC or EAH patients who received fertility-
sparing therapy. The study is interesting and clearly reported. I have only minor concerns:
1. the definition for the outcomes of treatment (i.e.CR, PR, NR or PD) should be reported;
2. Introduction and Discussion sections should be updated by considering other recent studies
in the field (PMID: 33812697, PMID: 33122144, PMID: 30793281, PMID: 30779338, PMID:
30342311)
Title: Significance of serum and pathological biomarkers in fertility- sparing treatment for
endometrial cancer or atypical hyperplasia: a retrospective cohort study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
I thank the Editor for giving me the chance to review this manuscript. Wang et al performed
a retrospective study in order to assess the significance of serum and pathological biomarkers
in predicting the response to fertility-sparing treatment for endometrial cancer or atypical
hyperplasia. The study is well-done; conclusions appear supported by the results and figures
are adequate. I have an interesting suggestion for the authors. As several clinical factors have
been assessed to predict the response to treatment in this field (e.g. PMID: 32799597, PMID:
31203571, PMID: 31165649, PMID: 30017893), could the authors consider them in the analysis
and compare their results with previous studies? If not, they should at least discuss them and the
chance to integrate them with the other assessed factors in a future predictive model.