JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Effect of Educational Intervention based on Health Belief Model on Accident Prevention
Behaviours in Mothers of Children under 5-Years
Version: 1 Date: 29 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Effect of Educational Intervention based on Health Belief Model on Accident Prevention
Behaviours in Mothers of Children under 5-Years
I applaud the authors for conducting an interesting article in Iran. The study does have
weaknesses in method section, and the manuscript could be helped with significantly better
editing. It also requires grammatical revised.
a. Please write the sampling strategy and date and country of study in abstract
b. It was better if you wrote some of main finding as quantitative or mean ±SD within the
abstract. The result section in the abstract is poor and immature!!
c. What are the data extract’s center characteristics? is it governmental or private, is it referral
or not referral and so on, discuss more about it
d. How many observers did you have? if you had more than one observer, you must mention
agreement index like kappa coefficient (write in method section
e. Mention the possible score (range) for each scales and meaning of it so easier to readers
interpret the results.
f. There are some spelling and grammatical errors in the text. Please correct them
g. Please mention the weak and strong points of your study
h. The novelty of your work must be discussed , it seems it is so weak
i. Which method for analysis did you used? Intention-To-Treat (ITT) or Per Protocol
j. Did you have any missing value in your study? If it was, please write what was your strategy
for solving this problem. It is critical points for control non response bias. please mention it
k. You could increase the number of more recently studies in the reference section. You should
have comprehensive and reliable comparisons between your findings with the other previous
studies. Furthermore, write about the limitations of your survey. Are there any limitations for
this study? If yes, please mention all limitations of current study within the discussion section
Title: Effect of Educational Intervention based on Health Belief Model on Accident Prevention
Behaviours in Mothers of Children under 5-Years
Version: 1 Date: 13 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript: "Effect of Educational Intervention
Based on Health Belief Model on Accident Prevention Behaviours in Mothers of Children under
5-Years". Accident prevention in young children is an important avenue for research and the
HBM-based intervention appears to be effective in changing perceptions as well as behavior.
However, there are a few issues that need to be addressed:
Introduction:
Please write clear hypotheses.
Methods:
It would be better to provide sub-headings, such as Participants, Measures, and Procedure.
Inclusion criteria - what does "minimum literacy" mean?
Which component of the HBM does "awareness" relate to?
What is the expected effect of the intervention (used in sample size calculations)? No need to
show the formula for sample size.
Please provide examples of the items used in the study.
The intervention is not sufficiently described (please provide exact materials that were used).
Please provide a timeline depicting the intervention (it is written that there were 6 sessions, but
then two more - are these part of the 6?)
Results:
What is the "family dimension"?
If the HBM is used, why not present a model of the components predicting performance?
Statistical findings that are in a table should not appear in the text as well.
Discussion:
The Discussion should be streamlined.
The intervention was conducted through a WhatsApp group. Aside from the need to further
describe how this operates (in the Methods section), it also poses a serious limitation.
Numerical values from the Results section do not usually appear in the Discussion.
In general, the manuscript could benefit from English proofreading and editing. Some sentences
are not clear, and others are redundant, such as: "The higher the mother's performance, the better
their preventive behaviors".
Title: A study on women’s health information needs in menopausal age
Version: 2 Date: 09 Oct 2021
Reviewer:  Caren J. Frost
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript presents interesting information.  I recommend not using the term "valid" with
the survey, since it has not been validated. Also, please provide clarification about the sampling
parameters--were only 301 women approached and they all agreed to participate?  This seems
highly unlikely. Please have an editor in English review the grammar--the subjects and verbs do
not agree in a number of places in the document.
Title: A study on women’s health information needs in menopausal age
Version: 4 Date: 06 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Karin Stanzel
Reviewer's report:
I would like to congratulate the authors on this very important paper on health information needs
of menopausal and postmenopausal women living in Iran.
It is much improved and reads very well. There are only 2 minor amendments that I would like
to recommend.
Introduction:
“To help women cope during menopause, it is important to identify their health information
needs.”
Reviewer’s comment:
As commented in my previous review ‘cope’ signifies a medical condition. Please change the
wording. You may find that most contemporary peer reviewed literature uses the term ‘manage’.
Methods:
Questionnaire design:
# Section 3: Information sought by menopausal women, comprising 42 items across six
categories: cancers (three items), other diseases (three items), menopausal symptoms (20 items),
consultations (four items), diagnostic methods (four items) and treatments (eight items).
Reviewers comment:
Please explain what you mean by consultations. Are you referring to health care consultation?
Kind regards and best wishes
Title: Group-based physical activity interventions for postpartum women with children aged
0-5 years old: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Version: 1 Date: 22 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Paulo Henrique Guerra
Reviewer's report:
Title: a review and synthesis of randomized and non-randomized studies is proposed. But in the
results, it indicates that all included studies are randomized controlled studies. In view of this
discrepancy, I recommend correction.
Still on the title, I bring a reflection: all systematic reviews present narrative synthesis. I
recommend using only "systematic review" and, somewhere in the text (e.g., Methods or
Discussion), indicating that no meta-analysis was done due to the great variability among studies
(e.g. populations, protocols, and physical activity indicators assessed).
Work in electronic databases: specific searches by titles and abstracts may configure as a
limitation of the study, for not being sensitive enough to capture poorly reported studies or
studies that adopt physical activity as a secondary outcome, with indication only in the full text
and/or tables, for example. I think this should be presented and discussed as a limitation of
systematic review.
I suggest removing Table 1 and indicating in Table 3 what each letter means, such as legends.
This makes it easier to read and understand the table, without having to go back in Table. 1 and/
or read the text. Anyway, I really liked the instrument that you adapted.
As for the methodological quality assessment, I particularly don't like the sum of items (reported
as “number of met criteria”). I suggest that the authors discuss more about the strengths and
weaknesses in the body of the studies, in the sense of informing which are the main points that
should be taken into consideration in the design of future interventions.
I suggest that you present a table of results, with effect sizes, not just p-values. This is a strategy
that allows comparability between the original studies.
Since the number of studies is small, which limits further comparisons, I recommend a special
look at the implementation and maintenance aspects of the original studies. One point of interest
is to discuss whether in the follow-up measures the women maintained the gains shown in the
immediate post-intervention period. I point this out because the postpartum period is a period
of many adaptations for women (e.g., social, cultural), which justifies, in part, the abandonment
of some behaviors observed during pregnancy.
Title: Help-seeking behaviour and associated factors among women who experienced physical
and sexual violence in Ethiopia: evidence from the 2016 Ethiopia Demographic and Health
Survey.
Version: 1 Date: 27 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for providing an opportunity for me to review this manuscript on help-seeking
behavior and associated factors. This is an interesting topic. Overall the paper is well organized,
the methods are appropriate, the results are presented clearly and the discussion reads well.
However, I feel minor revisions are needed to improve the manuscript further. I have highlighted
these as follows:
- It is not clear whether the intimate partner violence was investigated or not.
- How did they evaluate the wealth index?
- Was there any significant difference in the determinant factors in terms of physical and sexual
violence?
- English editing is needed.
Title: Help-seeking behaviour and associated factors among women who experienced physical
and sexual violence in Ethiopia: evidence from the 2016 Ethiopia Demographic and Health
Survey.
Version: 3 Date: 29 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you very much for the opportunity to review the revised manuscript. I truly enjoyed
reading this study as the subject matter is of interest to the research I am involved in :-). All
of my questions have been well addressed, particularly with regard to the focus of the study
on sexual and physical violence and the women who answered the help-seeking question after
experiencing violence - thank you for clarifying that it is not necessarily physical or sexual
violence by an intimate partner. Good luck in your publication - I think it is an important
contribution to the field!
I have very minor suggestions which could easily be addressed by the authors - please see below.
BACKGROUND:
Line 12 - missing a period at the end of the sentence after new reference that was added.
RESULTS
Help-seeking behaviour
Line 6-7 - suggest reword "On the other hand, for women who did not seek help, 174 (14.54%)
told someone about the violence after some time."
DISCUSSION:
Line 5-7 - Suggest:  "This study found that less than a quarter (22.5%) of women who
experienced violence sought help, which is in-line with a study completed in India [23],
demonstrating that most female victims of violence did not seek help." [add 'of' after a quarter
(22.5%)]
Line 14-16: "A study in Afghanistan revealed women aged 25–34 years old were more likely
seek help than the youngest group [26]. However, Karen. A reported that older women less
likely to report help seeking than young [30].
- Suggest adding "old" after years
- For Karen A. - is this Roberto et al. (2013)? If so suggest that sentence reads "However, Roberto
et al., (2013) reported that older women WERE less likely to report help seeking than their
younger counterparts."
Line 17-19 - suggest rewording to : "However, in some cases, as the age of the women increases
and they have been in a relationship longer, they became more autonomous, and learn how to
deal with the violence; this may contribute to a decrease in help-seeking behaviour [31].
Line 20 - 23: suggest rewording the sentences: "This may be because communication or
cognitive skills gained from being more educated may contribute to better conflict resolution
within marriage [37]. In addition, most often women are younger, not working, and less educated
than their husbands, and the husband tends to dominate and discipline the wife [38]. Conversely,
previous studies have revealed that women who had educated and employed husbands were less
likely to experience violence [32, 36]."
Line 18: suggest rewording to read "First, it used nationaly representative data which allowed
generalization of findings. Sample weights were applied in all analysis."
There is the addition of "Cross sectional" in paragraph right before the conclusion. Please
complete the sentence regarding the cross-sectional nature of the study.
Best wishes!
Title: Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Sudan and Subsequent Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
Version: 1 Date: 08 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues,
I appreciate the effort You have put into this study.
I have the following suggestions for improvement:
1. review the manuscript together with an English native speaker and correct spelling,
grammar and language. Clarity of expression should be improved to make your point better
understandable to the readers.
2. Add page- and line numbers to the entire manuscript
3. Shorten introduction & discussion considerably
4. A Pelvic-Organ-Prolapse-Quantification-Score (POP-Q-Score) is generally accepted today
as the quantitative description of prolapse and would be better the the Baden-Walker-System.
You should introduce it to Your hospital for all future studies.
5. The retrospective design introduces serious disadvantages for the research question asked,
i.e. whether FGM/C and POP are associated.
6. Please reference each and ALL assumptions in „Introduction“, especially the one: „…as the
severity of FGM increases, pelvic floor weakness and pelvic floor disorders occur …
7. Don´t jump from absolute numbers to percentages when you describe your data.
8. The POP groups cannot be divided into „symptomatic“ vs „asymptomati“ unless you have
additional information  about POP-related symptoms
9. The fifth paragraph of „results“ is difficult to understand. I suggest to review your numbers
and results with a statistician and phrase in simple terms (no numbers) what sentences you can
form according to your numbers.
Title: Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Sudan and Subsequent Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
Version: 3 Date: 02 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Hassan S. O. Abduljabbar
Reviewer's report:
Thank for you revision
The study is written in simple (English language)
single centre
The results table illustrate the result
Statistical In the multinominal logistic regression analysis appropriate
No conflicts of interests
Ethically approved
Conclusions: clear
References 34
Title: Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Sudan and Subsequent Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
Version: 3 Date: 05 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
Respected authors,
1. I again recommend to review the manscript with an English native speaker.
2. I recommend to substantially shorten "Introduction" and "Discussion"
3. lines 137 to 143 are a repetion and should be omitted
4. lines 226 to 230, and 238 to 246 are not directly relevant to the subject and can be omitted
Sincerely,
Title: The Role of Health Beliefs and Health Literacy in Women's Health Promoting Behaviours
based on the Health Belief Model: A descriptive study
Version: 1 Date: 11 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript provides a very interesting perspective to the study of the health belief model.
Its findings are relevant and fill gaps in the literature especially about female participants and
young populations in higher education levels. This stage in life represents a period of transition
into adulthood associated with an increased risk of developing poor mental health outcomes that
contribute and vice versa with deteriorating physical and mental health. More references can
be added to frame the importance of the study in this sense. I enjoyed reading it and suggested
several changes to highlight key aspects of this work.
Title: The Role of Health Beliefs and Health Literacy in Women's Health Promoting Behaviours
based on the Health Belief Model: A descriptive study
Version: 3 Date: 17 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper and I would like to commend the authors for
this interesting application of the health belief model in this area of research.  With this round
of revisions, the paper is much clearer and the reader would be able to appreciate the findings
and implications for future research. There are a few suggestions I have made to improve the
clarity of the sentences and accuracy of the reporting of the results. With these minor revisions,
I would recommend for this paper to be accepted for publication.
Title: The Role of Health Beliefs and Health Literacy in Women's Health Promoting Behaviours
based on the Health Belief Model: A descriptive study
Version: 3 Date: 17 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors have made a great effort to include the reviewer's comments. The information is
clear and the study is pertinent. Please revise minor comments to make it replicable in other
contexts and clarify a specific question about the statistical analysis.
Title: Expression levels of MCP-1, HGF, and IGF-1 in endometriotic patients compared with
non-endometriotic controls
Version: 1 Date: 01 Nov 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.
- Accumulating evidence suggests that immune cells, adhesion molecules, extracellular matrix
metalloproteinase and pro-inflammatory cytokines activate/alter peritoneal microenvironment,
creating the conditions for differentiation, adhesion, proliferation and survival of ectopic
endometrial cells. I would discuss these points in the light of new theories about the pathogenesis
of endometriosis, referring to: PMID: 31663401; PMID: 28100109; PMID: 26739265.
Title: Expression levels of MCP-1, HGF, and IGF-1 in endometriotic patients compared with
non-endometriotic controls
Version: 1 Date: 02 Nov 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.
- I would suggest to highlight the relationships between endometriosis and the host microbiome
(authors may refer to: PMID:  33851803).
Title: The distribution of reproductive risk factors disclosed the heterogeneity of receptor-
defined breast cancer subtypes among Tanzanian women
Version: 5 Date: 16 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors have addressed most of my previous comments in the revised version of the
manuscript. However, the "Results" and "Conclusions" sections of the abstract need to be revised
substantially. Given the lack of a cancer-free control group, it is inappropriate and misleading
to interpret certain factors as being associated with an increased risk or likelihood of (or being
protective against) developing a certain breast cancer subtype (please refer to previous comments
from both reviewers). For example, it is only appropriate to say that BC patients with certain
subtype is more/less likely to have a certain factor (e.g., ever breastfed) than BC patients with
the reference (luminal-A) subtype. Also, some of the OR estimates presented do not match those
reported in Table 3 - please check carefully. For the abstract, I suggest including OR estimates in
brackets instead of stating them as xx-fold increase in risk, which is incorrect. Please proofread
abstract and manuscript throughout to make sure numbers in the text match those presented in
the tables. Please also reconsider some of the reference groups used in Table 3 for easier and
more sensible interpretation.
Title: The distribution of reproductive risk factors disclosed the heterogeneity of receptor-
defined breast cancer subtypes among Tanzanian women
Version: 5 Date: 05 Sep 2021
Reviewer:  Asim Jamal Shaikh
Reviewer's report:
Please see my c1. there are several English language and grammatical mistakes
2. The results section needs to be summarized and information delegated to tables
3. The information summarized in tables does not need to be repeated in results section
4. The abstract is too wordy without highlighting major findings for example " heterogeneous
disease comprised of multiple molecular subtypes, with distinct clinical heterogeneity and
response to treatment " can just be stated as "BC is known to have distinct molecular subtypes"
5. The discussion has not incorporated recent data published from the region for example "
Breast cancer risk factors in relation to molecular subtypes in breast cancer patients from Kenya.
Shahin Sayed et al Breast Cancer Research volume 23, Article number: 68 (2021) " on other
hand there are too many references for an article of this size and information
6. The title is too big; it should encompass the goal of the study not describe it 7. conclusions
are hastily drawn, what is meant by " protects against a Luminal A " 8. Inclusion and exclusion
criteria can be summarized rather than stating it " as follows " , what is a inclusion criteria cannot
be repeated as exclusion criteria
7. . statistically speaking is this really a case-only cross-sectional study?
8.267 patients over a period of 10 years? how were they contacted and consented over this period
9. . was the time of their diagnosis matched with the time of the diagnosis when the data was
collected
Title: Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Cervical Cancer Prevention among Mothers
of girls aged between 9 and 14 years: a cross sectional survey in Zimbabwe
Version: 1 Date: 15 Sep 2021
Reviewer:  Hae Won Kim
Reviewer's report:
In this region, prevention of cervical cancer is quite important, and the study results have a
significant implication in this area and similar area potentially  to establish a CC prevention
strategy.  In this regard, this paper would be meaningful.
However, Generally writing style and format do not seem reader oriented.  Background, and
Results section should be well made systematically and logically so as to related  research
questions.
-title seems to be descriptive, but this study yielded relationships in the results.
-abstract is so general from background to conclusions, which should be revised  concretely and
precisely based on the research purpose and study results
-In the background: too much information not related study aim directly,   thus condensed work
necessary, and in the last part, it should be persuaded why certain demographic data in this study
were selected to confirm the association with core variables.
-  results should be shown the subtitle to reflect analysis and their results. and many of text
related data curation or coding like should be erased and moved into method, analysis part.
- Some tables would be integrated when the same analysis applied ( KAP and their relationships)