Title: Sexual violence and risk factors among Night Shift female College students in Hawassa
city, South Ethiopia, 2020
Version: 3 Date: 03 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Review comments on a manuscript numbered   b6c7c8cd-8196-46e5-b14f-113ef0c5502a
It is to be recalled that I reviewed the manuscript ‘numbered   b6c7c8cd-8196-46e5-
b14f-113ef0c5502a’ and submitted the following comments.
These comments are now addressed and the authors thoroughly reviewed the manuscript.
“Review comments on a manuscript numbered ‘numbered   b6c7c8cd-8196-46e5-
b14f-113ef0c5502a’
General Comments
This subject is important because it intended to present the Sexual violence and its
predictors which would provide important information to efficiently implement sexual violence
prevention and control programs. However, typographical and language organization should be
substantially improved.
This manuscript needs revision in the introduction,  methods and discussion
Specific Comments
Under Abstract part
The fifth sentence of Methods part under ‘Abstract’ which reads, “Both bivariate and
multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to recognize risk factors,” is not clear.
You study has only one dependent/response variable, So how it can be multivariate?
There is clear difference between multivariate and multivariable logistic regression,   similarly
for the case of bivariate, does you use uni-variate or bivariate analysis used to see the association
of each independent variable on the dependent variables??
- The second sentence of Result part under abstract, which reads as “the prevalence of last 12
month sexual violence was 202 (61.2%) 95% CI: (55.8, 66.4) which includes rape, attempted
rape and sexual harassment is very higher/large. Did you get such results from other study which
supports your result? , since you did not support your finding with other studies.
-  Your conclusion needs revision; conclusion is what different results your study gets, instead
of listing out of factors.
Under Methods part
The introduction part needs revision, the ideas are mixed-up, chronologically order of idea
preferable.
Under Methods part
When you determine the study sample size, you take margin of error as 5%, why you take it??
Why not you take 2%, 3% or other or do you have any reason that 5% is really the appropriate
margin of error?
From Study Setting, Design, Population, Sampling procedures,
Seven colleges were selected by using the lottery method and all government colleges were
included. Why you select seven only? Does these sevens are representative? This needs
statistically acceptable sapling procedure; samples were not taken at any random way.
Your sampling frame is 2nd year and above students, why you exclude first year students from
the study? Justify this.
You state those samples were selected though systematic sampling, and samples were allocated
though proportionally allocated sample size to each college). K = N/n =5.5#5, but it is not clear
what is k, N and n?.  K=5.5 but you take 5, why? You need revise and correctly what values
should be taken when the k value is in decimal.
You also write about proportional sample size allocation and how it can be determined/
calculated.
Data analysis
You state that, bi variant analysis was carried out to see the association of each independent
variable on the dependent variables. Bi-variate analysis implies that you had two response
variables, but you had only one dependent variable, so it needs revision.
Uni-vatiaet, bivariate and multivariate analysis are different models that depends on the number
of response variable(s).
Multivariate logistic regression to adjust the effect of confounders on the outcome variables. Is
it really multivariate logistic regression is appropriate for this study?. I mention the issue of this
in the abstract part.
Multicollinearity test was done to check the correlation between independent variables. For what
variables you used?  Because your independent variables all are categorical variables, while
multicollinearity is applicable if the covariates/independent variables were continuous. So is it
possible to test multicollinearity for categorical data? Even if the SPSS give you the result, does
it have meaning?
The HL test indicated that our final model was fit (p = 0.906).  But I did not get this result?
Discussion
The author tries to discuss the result of the manuscript, but the study needs detailed discussion
about the result of the study with other study results compare/ similar or contradict results with
possible justifications.
References
Your reference style is not  similar to the journals .
Please check the Instructions for Authors for the relevant journal citation and article type
Example :
https://bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12905-022-01968-8
Generally, Sexual violence among Night Shift female and its risk factors analyses need to be
conducted properly so as to disseminate valid information to stakeholders.”