Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Breast cancer screening knowledge among Hungarian women: A cross-sectional study
Version: 
0 
Date: 
11 Jul 2020
Reviewer: 
Abdul Nazer Ali
Reviewer's report:
In general, the grammar of the manuscript needs improvement for clear understanding of the reader. Style
correction is recommended.
Methods
1.P5L6: the subheading 'settings' 
may be changed as 'Study design and settings'.
2.The recruitment of subjects not clear. Is it from 12 GP clinics or 12 districts plus OPD, radiology? …
3.A clear inclusion and exclusion criteria on sample subjects will be useful for subsequent studies on the
topic.
4.P6L36: the subheading 'sampling' is recommended to be changed as 'Questionnaire development and
validation'
5.As mentioned, the questions were self drafted, the questionnaire needs validation (pilot study results for
questionnaire validity e.g cronbachs alpha) details other than subject experts and potential participants.
6.If questions adapted from other studies, reference need to be added.
7.Table 1: The criteria for classifying financial situation need explanation.
Results:
1. The comparison among screening attendees and laywomen may be used uniformly throughout the text
as per results displayed in Tables (Laywomen Vs Screening attendees) for easy understanding. Please
check P8 L2 (86.6% vs. 35.2% is screening attendees vs. Laywomen whereas P8L4: 33.9% and 12.9% is
laywomen and screening
Limitation:
'General practitioners, specialists, and medical assistants were asked not to aid participants in completing
the questionnaires so as not to influence their answers.'The statement is NOT the study limitation. Please
remove from limitations.
Conclusion:
Last line maybe changed to - recommended for BC screening attendees.
Reference: All references to be checked for style and uniformity
1.#7: Rojas K, Stuckey A. Breast cancer epidemiology and risk factors. Clinical obstetrics and
gynecology. 2016 Dec;59(4):651-72.
2.#19 and 20 has too many authors. Usually the first six authors followed by et al is used in references.
Please check the journal referencing guidelines.
3.Most of the references are outdated. Recent studies (past 5 years) should be a good choice to cover the
latest findings on the subject matter.
Figures:
Figures should contain the chart titles, both the axis and the legends within the figure for easy
interpretation of results
All figures need to be corrected for chart titles, both the axis and the legends within the figure.
Declaration:
Under declaration, number of participants mentioned is wrong (n=6542)
Funding 
Typo error funded by "GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00048 - STAY ALIVE"
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to Publons
(a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, please click on
the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted to Publons upon
publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt
of this review and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with
Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be able to
recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative
metadata for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such
information. For example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate
reviewers. Please find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
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 are required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
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:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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 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 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
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access
Creative Commons CC-BY License (
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is
accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published report have
been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completing
the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether
to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you
change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please publish my name with my report.