Reviewer’s report
Title: A Qualitative Study on Reasons for Early Removal of Implanon among Users in Arba Minch
Town, Gamo Goffa Zone, South Ethiopia: A Phenomenological Approach
Version: 0 Date: 12 Feb 2019
Reviewer: Emmanuel Morhe
Reviewer's report:
This qualitative study explores reasons for premature or early removal of implanon implants by some
method acceptors in Arba Minch in south Ethiopia. The manuscript is generally well written. However,
a few concerns require some attention.
Methodology
1.      Please, within what time period is being referred as "recently had implanom removal"?
2.      How were the women identified and contacted?
3.      Please, for clarity, a brief description of what is done (process) will be cherished by readers. 
Normally, purposive sampling is based on some reasoning; what made the researchers select two 
particular kebeles out of eleven? Similarly, how were the households and women selected? 
4.      Some reconciliation of the two the descriptions of the total number of women interviewed is 
required;  "selected 2 kebeles and five women from each" and  "sample size was determined based on 
the concept of saturation"
Results:
5.      It is more informative when range is stated with median or the minimum and maximum is just 
stated
6.      Were there further explorations on what respondents meant by "heavy menses" and "sick 
looking"? 
Syntax:
7.      Page 3, lines 48/49 : "use of long-acting" instead of "long-acting reversible"
"HEWs" used several times without writing it in full, the first time it was used in main text on Page 5 
lines 48/49;
8.      Conclusion could more concise by avoiding some repetition 
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 have no conflict of interest to declare
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 Access 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