JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Reviewer's report
Title:Participation in breast cancer screening among women of Turkish origin in
Germany - a register-based study
Version: 1Date:13 October 2013
Reviewer: Vahit Ozmen
Reviewer's report:
This is a prospectively designed retrospective clinical study with a title of
“Participation in breast cancer screening among women of Turkish origin in
Germany – a register-based study.” The aim of this study was to investigate
breast cancer screening participation among women of Turkish origin in
Germany.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1.This study only gives participation rates of breast cancer screening among
women of Turkish origin and women of non-Turkish origin. Comparison between
Turkish origin and autochthonous population might be preferred to give better
results excluding other immigrants in Germany. And, addition a survey about
factors related with non-participation in population based screening program
increase in value of the study.
2.There is a discordance between Dr.Albert’s study (66%) and this study (%50)
regarding the rate of participation in breast cancer screening program in
Germany. It is difficult to understand this big gap.
Minor Revisions
1.What is the rate of authoctonous and other immigrant origins in study
population?
2.Page 3 first sentence “Breast cancer is the most common cancer among
women in western countries” may be in the World .
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Participation in breast cancer screening among women of Turkish origin in
Germany - a register-based study
Version:1Date:30 October 2013
Reviewer: Maria Trigoni
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The study focuses on an important topic. It will be helpful if authors can state the
research questions clearly and also provide a list of the questions they used. In
the methodology is not sufficiently described the research questions and the
research tool
It would be important if the research questions of the survey recorded clearly in
the text.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have no competing interest below
Reviewer's report
Title:Participation in breast cancer screening among women of Turkish origin in
Germany - a register-based study
Version:1Date:20 November 2013
Reviewer: Mona Jeffreys
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript describes rates of participation in mammography screening in
Turkish women in five German cities/towns.
Major Compulsory Revisions
Given the overall screening rate of about 50%, the use of ORs as estimates of
risk is not appropriate. On Page 8, the authors make reference to this, implicitly
calculating risk differences.
Are the cities/towns that were chosen representative of Germany in terms of
overall screening? I therefore wonder whether the results be generalised to all of
Germany or not? This is only touched on on Page 9.
The five areas differ markedly in their screening rates. The proportion of Turkish
women in each area should also be given in Table 1. Migration to a particular
place is not random, and i suggest that Turkish women in Paderborn are very
different from those in Berlin (for example). The implications of this need a full
discussion.
I disagree with the authors' assumption that the misclassification of ethnicity
using a name-based algorithm will be non-differential (Page 10). It seems
plausible to me that Turkish women who have changed their name through
marriage may well have a different rate of screening to those who have not done
so. The authors'quoted estimate of the sensitivity of the algorithm appears to be
based on publications from the cancer registry (men and women) and the
childhood cancer registry. Furthermore, the gold standard in the childhood
cancer registry paper compares the algorithm to manual name assessment,
which is a different question as to whether the name based algorithm correctly
assesses ethnicity.
The authors' conclusions need to be considered in the light of possible biases,
before assuming that their findings are correct.
Minor Essential Revisions
The term "Women with migration background" is not correct English. Either use
Turkish vs. non-Turkish (as in Table 2), or "Women who have migrated to
Germany" (or similar).
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Primary Amenorrhea in the Physician's Office: Normal Coitus or Not?
Always Take a Look.
Version: 4Date:5 June 2013
Reviewer: Tarek Shokeir
Reviewer's report:
This paper describes a case report which does not make a contribution to
medical knowledge and does not have educational value or highlight the need for
a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognostic approaches.
General Comments:
BMC Women's Health does not consider case reports describing preventive or
therapeutic interventions as these require stronger evidence.
Specific Comments:
1-Case reports should include relevant positive and negative findings from
history, clinical examination, and investigations. There are a lot of publications
and many case reports concerning the issue of primary amenorrhea in
adolescents caused by Mayer-Rokitansky-Klister-Hauser syndrome (MRKH-Type
II) and associated with urethral intercourse. Coexistance with pituitary adenoma
(micro or macro) is not a novel [Eom KS et al. (J Clin Neurosci, 2009)].
2-For Case 1:
-How did the family physician report 'normal' results on screening with Pap
smears in a case with absent vagina and cervix?.
-What were the tumor markers performed for this case?.
-What was the initial size of the microadenoma at first presentation?.
-What was the dose and course of quinagolide given?. how was the progress
with the treatment going on?.
-A supplementation with a laparoscopic picture for the herniated inguinal gonad
rather than a picture for dilated urethra would be very appreciated.
3-For Case 2:
-We think that it is difficult to consider gradual vaginal dilataion as a first line
treatment option for a case with total vaginal aplasia with no any pre-existing
small vaginal pouch.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
None declared.
Reviewer's report
Title:Primary Amenorrhea in the Physician's Office: Normal Coitus or Not?
Always Take a Look.
Version:4Date:21 December 2013
Reviewer: Karine Morcel
Reviewer's report:
The authors report 2 cases of urethral coïtus by adolescent women, and, for one
of them, the association between MRKH syndrome and pituitary
microprolactinomia.
This paper has flaws which need to be addressed (Major Compulsory revisions):
1) Many similar cases have already been reported in the literature. Recently, two
similar cases associated with an interesting review of the literature were
published by Rickman J et al. in J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. This paper is not
referred by the authors.
2) The only interest of this manuscript would be to highlight that a gynaecologic
exam must always be performed in case of primary amenorrhea despite a normal
sexual activity, prior to dismiss an anatomic aetiology. In this case, the
discussion should be rewritten to emphasize this point.
3) In last, the association between MRKH syndrome and pituitary
micorprolactinemia may be random. The authors don't take into account the
relative frequency of both diseases and don't discuss the possibility of a
coincidental association.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:A qualitative study of factors affecting mental health amongst low-income
working mothers in Bangalore, India.
Version: 2Date:19 September 2013
Reviewer: Michelle Kermode
Reviewer's report:
Thankyou for inviting me to review this manuscript. The topic is an important one
that is under-researched. The authors have used appropriate methods of data
collection and have drafted a clear and systematic account of their study process
and findings.
MINOR ESSENTIAL REVISIONS
p.7 - Study setting and participants
Please describe in more detail how the specific study sites were selected, and
then how the individual women were selected from within those sites.
p.8 - data collection and analysis
Please provide a reference for the 'socio-economic status questionnaire' or if this
is not possible explain how it was developed and what it consisted of.
p.24 Discussion
The section on the proposed interventions to address the issue of domestic
violence neglects to mention the need for strategies that target men specifically
and the broader community generally i.e. raising awareness of the negative
consequences of violence within the family, and the need to promote the
unacceptability of family violence as a social value
p.27 Conclusion
'we examined all life aspects and routine life...' I don't understand what this
means - please reword this sentence so the meaning is clearer
Also, upper case 'N' is used only for the entire population - a sample is
designated with lower case 'n'. This applies to both the text and the tables.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:A qualitative study of factors affecting mental health amongst low-income
working mothers in Bangalore, India.
Version:2Date:2 January 2014
Reviewer: Helen Herrman
Reviewer's report:
This paper is a valuable and well presented contribution to the literature on
women's mental health in low-income countries. The implications of the findings
are well drawn fro mental health policy in India and other countries. The
background is well presented and the aims stated clearly. The methods including
the ethical aspects of the study are adequately described and the results
presented in an engaging and useful manner. The discussion gives a very useful
set of suggestions about the relevance of the findings for mental health policy.
the writing is good.
i have several suggestions for the authors
Minor essential revisions
The limitations of the study need to be mentioned as well as its strengths.
In reporting a cross-sectional study it is not possible to make causal attributions
and distracting to see this in a few places. I suggest edit to avoid unwarranted
statements of causation e.g. last line p2, Abstract "Factors that reduced anxiety
and depression were…'; p 19 "negative working conditions also affected ..'; p 23
'…this can push..' ; p24 '…was one of the most frequent causes of poor mental
health ..' And where causation is described by interviewees to ensure it is
reported as such e.g. p 12 'The resolution of some or all of the stressors brought
improvements in their mental health state'; and p 16 'Roona's circumstances had
resulted in chronic depression and two suicide attempts' need editing to attribute
the causal attribution to the subjects.
the process of translating and transcribing the interviews into English needs
description.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
i declare that i have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Vocal local versus pharmacological treatments for pain management in
tubal ligation procedures in rural Kenya: a non-inferiority study
Version:2Date:23 October 2013
Reviewer: Nilanchali Singh
Reviewer's report:
Good study on a simple technique. Study design is good.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. Were the patients informed about no use of analgesia while taking an informed
consent? What was their response?
2. Were all cases at a center performed by same doctor? How does it impact the
study?
3. How were the assistants trained for VL? By whom?
4. Does training of these assistants, keeping separate assistants for this job does
not incur charges? Considering this fact, how to explain cost reduction?
5. How can this technique be useful in Cesarean as mentioned by the author?
Local anaesthesia is not recommended for Cesareans?
6. Most painful moment should have also included the time of performing the
procedure as most of the patients have maximum pain while holding the tubes.
Discretionary Revisions
7. Cases and controls were recruited from different centers. This could have lead
to many biases including the different personnel giving VL differently. What do
the authors say about allocation of patients in two groups from each center?
Minor Essential Revisions
8. Brief description of VL technique would increase the value of this article.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Vocal local versus pharmacological treatments for pain management in
tubal ligation procedures in rural Kenya: a non-inferiority study
Version:2Date:27 November 2013
Reviewer: robert L barkin
Reviewer's report:
thank you for the submission to this journal,please consider the following: in the
abstract define VL/LA and in the body of the article initially,change opiate to
opioid,back ground expand on VL AND LA. on p3;p 4 anesthetic define which
one,analgesics define which one,later tramadol comes up with
lidocaine/lignocaine. As an aside consider the expectations of other patients in
other countries where a broader plan of ob anesthesia/analgesia is expected,this
deserves retrospective/prospective comments on patient expectation and how
this unique method may be population specific
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
no financial,personal,corporate or any other interest in the review of this paper,I
declare that I have no competing interest
Reviewer's report
Title:Vocal local versus pharmacological treatments for pain management in
tubal ligation procedures in rural Kenya: a non-inferiority study
Version:3Date:18 January 2014
Reviewer: Nilanchali Singh
Reviewer's report:
I am satisfied with the article in its present form. No revisions expected.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Women's experiences and health care-seeking practices in relation to
uterine prolapse in a hill district of Nepal
Version: 1Date:9 August 2013
Reviewer: Kang Youngmi
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Women's experiences and health care-seeking practices in relation to
uterine prolapse in a hill district of Nepal
Version:1Date:22 October 2013
Reviewer: Pinar Ay
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting study about health seeking behavior and experiences of
women with UP. The study is important in encompassing both qualitative and
quantitative methods. While quantitative data are presented thoroughly,
qualitative findings, I believe, need to be explored more deeply.
Major revisions:
- Qualitative methods are valuable in exploring “how”s and “why”s, pointing out to
similarities and differences. So it would enrich the findings if the authors would
elaborate on why and how some women communicate their problems while the
others hide them, why some women are cared and supported by their husbands
while others are abused etc. How do behavioral patterns differ among educated
and illiterate or socioeconomically disadvantaged and advantaged women?
Minor revisions:
- On page 7 the authors state that they had collected quantitative data through
in-depth interviews. It should be qualitative instead of quantitative.
- There is no need for Table 1.
- On Table 3, percentages regarding the educational status don’t add up to
100%.
- On Tables 5-7, CIs are not necessary. Since a convenient sample is used the
findings are not representative of the study population. So CIs don’t provide us
any additional information.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Women's experiences and health care-seeking practices in relation to
uterine prolapse in a hill district of Nepal
Version:2Date:30 December 2013
Reviewer: Pinar Ay
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript had improved and is now acceptable. The authors just need to
correct the percentages on Tables1 and 2. Some percentages are expressed
with none while others with one or two decimal places.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Women's experiences and health care-seeking practices in relation to
uterine prolapse in a hill district of Nepal
Version:2Date:11 January 2014
Reviewer: Kang Youngmi
Reviewer's report:
Discretionary Revisions
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Factors associated with the utilisation of postnatal care services among the
mothers of Nepal: Analysis of Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2011
Version: 2Date:29 September 2013
Reviewer: Christiana Titaley
Reviewer's report:
General comments
The manuscript has been greatly improved. I really appreciate the way authors
responded to each comment. There are few issues that authors might want to
address the improve the manuscript further.
Minor Essential Revisions
• In the Methods Section authors mentioned the issue of collinearity which forced
them to select some variables over the other, e.g. selecting attendance over
place of delivery . Yet in the modelling both variables were still retained in the
model. Did authors decide to ignore this or were the variables entered one at a
time? Because by looking at the table, people will think both variables were
included at the same time in Model 3. Although I think both variables are ok to be
in the final model, there is some inconsistency between text and table. This is
also the case for timing and number of ANC variables.
• I think the issue of collinearity between maternal age and other covariates still
exists for both outcomes. The unadjusted OR of mothers from higher maternal
age were significantly lower than those from 15-19; yet, in the final model (Model
3) the direction of the effect changed, to significantly higher than those aged
15-19. This is important since it will impact the interpretation of the findings,
conclusion and the recommendations given.
• Please check some spelling mistakes. There are few typos e.g: Methods
Section page 5: "Outcome variables", Discussion Section page 12, 3rd
paragraph line 3 should read "services", or page 13 2nd paragraph line 2, should
read "findings". Please use the spell check.
• Some paragraphs are still very lengthy, such as 1st paragraph in the Discussion
section. Authors might want to break it down to two or three paragraphs.
• The issue of mothers in law who might potentially influence the decision was
not demonstrated in the findings. Authors might want to remove it from the first
paragraph, or explain it later as one of the possibilities.
• Please check the decimal digits to ensure their consistency
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Factors associated with the utilisation of postnatal care services among the
mothers of Nepal: Analysis of Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2011
Version:2Date:23 October 2013
Reviewer: David Doku
Reviewer's report:
Factors associated with the utilisation of postnatal care services among the
mothers of Nepal: Analysis of Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2011
The manuscript has improved.
Here are a few concerns.
Introduction
Page 3 last paragraph there is a contradiction in the data presented here. The
figures show an increase pace but the text states a decreased pace from
1996-2011. Please clarify
Methods
Outcome variables
Page 5. What is the rationale for combining missing responses with “no
response” or “late postnatal care”? This is a major problem in the methodology.
Page 6. It is not clear what the order of ranking of the autonomy variable is
looking at the categorisation. What do the authors imply?
Still on page 6, the authors should present the percentage of Hindus rather than
simply stating that they are the majority.
Page 7. Reference to West 2008 is noted, nevertheless the authors should
highlight briefly how they use Complex Simple Analysis Procedure to address the
issue of cluster sampling.
Results and Discussion
Page 11. “In Nepal ….mother and the newborn are not allowed to be touched by
anyone in the house or go out of the house has been previously reported in other
parts of Asia [28, 29] and has been found to discourage postnatal care
attendance [29].” This sentence is not clear, especially given that the references
are not from studies in Nepal.
Page 12. The first sentence that has been added is not really clear. Could the
authors clarify this?
Judging from the last paragraph on page 14, it is a bit strange that the "variables"
younger mothers and mothers with high parity predict the outcome in similar
direction.
One would expect that younger mother are those with low parity and mothers
with high parity are older mothers. Did the authors explore the correlation
between age and parity?
The entire manuscript needs rigorous editing for typo errors. Numerous of them
are found in the result section, particularly on pages 9-10. And there are several
of them in the entire manuscript.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
None declared