JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Effect of Behavior Change Communication through the Health Development Army
on Birth Weight of Newborns in Ambo District, Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled
community trial
Version: 7 Date: 02 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer’s comments
Research title: Effect of Behavior Change Communication through the Health Development
Army on Birth Weight of Newborns in Ambo District, Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled
community trial
This manuscript has been improved from the previous version. Nevertheless, it needs a final
revision before being accepted for publication.
The manuscript needs further English grammar edition
Line 62 to 65 in the introduction section … on the description of RCT findings the intervention
not presented. Is the researcher want show the prevalence of LBW or the intervention effects
on LBW? This is not clear for the reader
Line 65 to 66.. did the researcher review the recent EDHS conducted in 2019 to show LBW?
Researchers should clearly indicate which hypothesis is primary and which is secondary. In cases
where all these are secondary hypotheses and the primary hypothesis is published, this should
be described in the manuscript and cited. Previously published findings should not be repeated
in this manuscript. Whenever some information is interrelated to a previous publication, the
previous publication needs to be cited by the researcher.
How were HDR and participants blind to hypotheses are not clear? Public health interventions
cannot be made blind because of their nature. In clinical trials, for example in the drug versus
placebo test, it is possible to make the patients blind, which means they do not know if they
are receiving the drug or the placebo. Due to the nature of the intervention, I do not believe
this would work for a public health intervention. Does it make sense to hide the experimental
hypothesis from participants? The reason for this is that patients might assist them in deciding
their free will to participate
Title: Effect of Behavior Change Communication through the Health Development Army
on Birth Weight of Newborns in Ambo District, Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled
community trial
Version: 7 Date: 17 Jun 2023
Reviewer:  Abebe Ferede
Reviewer's report:
Abstract background part: explained Why dis intervention research project is important/ its
urgency and teh major  implications of teh study  to teh concerned group or Scientific community
Methods:
1.Sample size
Sample size was sufficient for clusters competition, but wifin 48 inter cluster analysis is a very
challenging and require large sample size.
2. Selection of Study participants (mixed groups) more participant from rural is admirable
Teh article TEMPhas a written protocol dat describes teh research question(s), hypotheses,
review method, and designed for how teh data had extracted and compiled.
Teh article was well-formulated focused to exposure of interest, wif comparison relevant group.
Teh document covered by unnecessary methodology statement and   intervention program
description require limiting teh size of these part, coz main parts of methods, interventions and
results covered.
Title: Effect of Behavior Change Communication through the Health Development Army
on Birth Weight of Newborns in Ambo District, Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled
community trial
Version: 9 Date: 08 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer’s comments
Research title: Effect of Behavior Change Communication through the Health Development
Army on Birth Weight of Newborns in Ambo District, Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled
community trial
Comments
The manuscript has been improved from the previous version. However, it still needs to be
revised before publication.
An English edition and summarization is needed for some parts of the statement
I advised the researchers first mention the primary hypothesis of the randomized trial and cite
the publication and then tell what the current manuscript will answer (the secondary hypothesis).
In the research hypothesis section under the bracket the researcher said secondary outcome rather
than hypothesis. I think it should be corrected as secondary hypothesis. Both terms are not the
same
The timeline written in the abstract section is different from the method section.
Line 154 statement not complete… in previously published work
I recommended to summarize the intervention section in short paragraph. Some of the statements
in the intervention section are not clear. Additionally, I would recommend to avoid the
implementation section which is not added new information from intervention section.
Please check spelling error in line number 341
Title: Utilization of sexual and reproductive health services among construction worker women
in southern Ethiopia
Version: 1 Date: 06 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Title: Sexual and Reproductive health service utilization and associated factors among daily
worker women at Sodo town construction site, Wolaita, southern Ethiopia: a community-based
cross-sectional study.
1. The question posed by the author and co-authors i.e. factors associated towards Sexual and
Reproductive health service utilization is not unquestionably new. There are similar studies have
been conducted in different parts of Ethiopia. However, this research question is very essential.
2. The method (i.e a community based cross sectional) used is suitable for a study. Nevertheless,
the description is insufficient and there were inadequate details for others to replicate the work.
For example, the variables and tools used were not clearly well-defined and the author should
replace a “study variable” as a Variable and Measurement; and then describe it in a narrative
and/or paragraph format. Replace “Definition of terms” by operational definition.
3. In the result section, the figures appear to be genuine. However, authors should consider
merging the low responses in the tables.  Example: In “Table 1”, a variable “Marital status” has a
low responses for “Widowed” & “Divorced”, in which the responses are less than 5%. Consider
cancellation of a word “binary” from a “Table 5” label.
4. Regarding to the conclusion section, actually, no need to write a figure (i.e 54.4%) under that
section. Instead use terms/words describing a figure.
5. There are few grammar errors in this manuscript.
Title: Exploring risk factors of pelvic organ prolapse at eastern of Democratic Republic of
Congo: A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 14 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
The objective of this study was to explore risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse in a population in
eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The authors conducted a case-control-study, including
434 women. They identified low BMI, a height equal to or less than 150cm, home birth, history
of episiotomy and previous delivery of a macrosomic baby, that were all significantly associated
with prolapse.
This is an interesting study, as it explores risk factors for POP in a low-income setting.
I only have a few comments:
Abstract
Line 27: “treatment” should be “surgical treatment”
Results: the p-values should come after OR and CI
Background:
Please specify if your interest is symptomatic or anatomical prolapse, as many women with
anatomical prolapse are asymptomatic.
Line 62: Please specify what you mean by “such care”, probably POP surgery? Or pessaries?
Other treatment?
Line 70-72: Symptomatic or anatomical POP?
Statistics
Line 134: “categorielle” should be “categorical”
Line 135: “use” should be “used”
Please, in general, check the language in the statistics section
Results:
Two first paragraphs: Instead of just saying that the difference between the groups was
statistically significant, please explain how the groups were different (cases ….. BMI units
heavier or lighter than controls.
Line 160: From Table 1, it seems that Episiotomy is protective, can you check these calculations?
Should give an OR <1
Discussion
213, and 228: Instead of numbers, please explain: did POP risk increase 3-fold for each unit
increase in BMI? Or did you use another scale?
Line 239-242: I don’t quite understand what you intend to say. Shorther women probably have
smaller levator hiatuses and are at greater risk of levator avulsion?
Table 1: for the variables occupation and place of delivery: I don’t understand these proportions.
Should add up to 100% for each group. Please check and clarify
Table 2: Did you accidentally invert the OR for episiotomy? It should be the opposite; if there is a
larger proportion of women with episiotomy among controls than cases, episiotomy is protective
for POP.
Title: Exploring risk factors of pelvic organ prolapse at eastern of Democratic Republic of
Congo: A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 20 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thanks very much for this manuscript.
There is some comments and questions for authors:
1.The sample size was calculated from women with positive family history of POP as subjects
and no family history as control, however, this is not the case for the recruitment in this study.
Then the calculation will not be valid.
2. what is the definition of macrosomia in this analysis? what is the mean birth weight in your
population?
3. the factors of BMI has already included the body height in it. Both the BMI and body height
was included in the logistic regression analysis, will there be problem of collinearity?
4.The percentage of home birth in this cohort is high (165/434= 38%), how did the authors obtain
the information about baby birth weight?
5. what is the definition used for 'low BMI' in the binary regression analysis?  please specify.
6.in order to have a more specific analysis in your population, do you aware any other risk
factors that is specific to your population that has not been reported in other urban populations?
eg teenage pregnancy problem with their age at first delivery?
7. after the anaylsis with those risk factors identified, what are the possible strategy that authors
would propose for POP prevention?
Thank you
Title: The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual Symptoms and
Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Version: 3 Date: 27 Oct 2023
Reviewer:  Zahra Mohebbi-Dehnavi
Reviewer's report:
The conclusion of the abstract should be consistent with the title of the study and better
expressed.
Use up-to-date and newer references.
The method of doing the work should be mentioned in full.
Use more detailed tests to express the results so that the importance of your work is determined.
The discussion needs to be rewritten to be stronger.
Match the keywords with the mesh.
Title: The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual Symptoms and
Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Version: 3 Date: 21 Jan 2024
Reviewer:  Ashraf Kazemi
Reviewer's report:
Your valuable manuscript has been read. Although the presentation of the report has many
strengths, some areas need to be improved, which are presented below
Please change the title to “The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual
Symptoms and Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial”
Abstract
Please mention briefly about the context of the subject in background subsection.
If you detect the women with Premenstrual Symptoms according to the first phase, please
mention it in the method subsection. Who entered the second phase of the study? Women with
PMS? Please be clear.
Was HRW replaced against water consumption or not.
According to the title, the type of your study was clinical trial. I suggest that skip the statement
of the first part of the research as the stage of prevalence assessment and, consider this part of
the study as the screening stage of those eligible for the research. Also, in the method section,
clearly state the type of study as a controlled clinical trial.
Background
It is proposed to provide a link between the pathogenesis of the disease and an explanation of
how hydrogen may alter the causal pathway of this pathology.
Method
For the “scoring 132 or above on the Premenstrual Syndrome Scale, not receiving medical
treatment for PMS..” please cite the refence.
Please delete “irregular menstruation” as a exclusion criteria. Because a regular mensural cycle
was the inclusion criterion.
What about pregnancy. Was this criterion as exclusion criteria/?
Exactly at what time interval from the start of hydrogen consumption? Please write the exact
time of water consumption and the exact time of measuring PMS severity in each stage based
on the menstrual cycle.
Please explain about the random selection and random allocation more.
Please explain about blindness.
Results
The setting of the table 3 is not good.
I could not find the results of the MANOVA test. Provide results related to changes in PMS
severity and QoLife.
The graphs presented are named as figures and the naming does not seem correct. Please remove
the graphs if the graph results have already been presented.
Discussion
Please avoid repeating the results in the discussion section.
If the report of the screening stage is omitted as the stage of prevalence assessment, make the
discussion about the prevalence of PMS shorter.
Because oxidative stress conditions were not investigated in your study, it is unnecessary to
discuss the antioxidant effects of hydrogen.
Conclusion
In the conclusion section, only draw conclusions based on your results and do not provide
reference.
Title: The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual Symptoms and
Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Version: 3 Date: 23 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
1. Enhance the abstract by providing more detailed information about the methodology and
results, including the method of sampling and randomization.
2. Reframe the conclusion in the abstract to avoid using emphatic sentences. Instead, use
suggestive sentences to convey the study's findings. For example, "According to the results of
this study, it can be concluded that..."
3. Select keywords from MeSH and consider adding questionnaires to the list of keywords.
4. Include the first stage of the study in the design section on page 5.
5. Review the exclusion criteria on page 7 and consider moving certain criteria, such as the
absence of irregular menstruation in the last three cycles, to the inclusion criteria.
6. Determine if the study is single-blind and clarify this on page 8.
7. Explain the validity of the questionnaires used in the study.
8. Mention the code of ethics followed in the study.
9. Explain the repeated-measures MANOVA analysis (Tables 4 and 5) by group, time/group,
and time.
10. Clarify that the homogeneity of the two groups at the beginning of the study is not a finding
of the study. Additionally, ensure that the demographic criteria do not show a statistically
significant difference between the two groups to establish their homogeneity. For example, "The
mean PMSS scale scores were similar between the groups before the intervention (p>0.05),"
should be revised.
Title: The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual Symptoms and
Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Version: 7 Date: 14 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Ashraf Kazemi
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors
Thank you for  corrections. An edited version is  acceptable. Only a minor revision needs to be
made. The results related to the confidence interval are not visible in Table 3.
Title: The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Water Consumption on Premenstrual Symptoms and
Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Version: 7 Date: 15 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
We appreciate your feedback. It is recommended to make revisions in the following areas:
1. The explanation of ANOVA tables should include a sphericity test with Mauchly's statistics to
clarify whether sphericity is assumed or not, we recommend integrating this information into the
text of the article, specifically on page 13, to facilitate reader comprehension, for this purpose,
you can use the chart.
2. Ensure that the number of words in the abstract section is limited to less than 250.
Title: The need for and acceptability of a curriculum to train nursing and medical students in
the sexual healthcare of clients with female genital mutilation/cutting in Tanzania
Version: 1 Date: 13 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
The need for and acceptability of a curriculum to train nursing and medical students in the sexual
healthcare of clients with female genital mutilation/cutting in Tanzania: A mixed methods study
Abstract
1. Methods: The study method mentioned mixed methods and also qualitative data. How was
the qualitative data obtained? Open-ended questions in a questionnaire not qualitative data. So,
this is a purely quantitative study.
2. Results: Line 39, what is a “... high level of training in sexual healthcare for women with
FGM/C?” How was the high level measured/determined? Only 8.8% were well educated on
what? What is “well-educated” in the study?
Main Work
1. Line 176, please remove “etc” and list make a full list of what was included under “sexual
health through the lifespan.”
2. Lines 184- 188. Open-ended questions in a questionnaire are not qualitative study. This is
a purely quantitative study because no qualitative study was done alongside it, after which the
data would be triangulated to provide in-depth and broader answers to the research question (s).
Data in the form of texts/narrations do not imply qualitative study was done. Qualitative study
has its methodology and aim. Please you may do some reading on this.
3. Were the questionnaires self-developed or adapted? How were the participants recruited?
What is the sampling method and how was the sample size calculated to ensure fair
representation of the study population?
4. For this aspect of the study, was the data obtained from the intervention or control group or
both (since the control group), and if from both, how were the data from both group handled
for this aspect of the study, since (obviously) the control group did not get the curriculum
intervention, and (according to this manuscript) the data for this study was obtained after the
intervention.
5. Figure 1, were the participants given any definition of “well educated, some education etc”
before they completed the questionnaire? What is “well educated, some education etc” in this
study? How would a participant decide to know which of those options to choose?
6. Please be consistent with the use of FGM or FGM/C or FGC/M all through the study. Stick
to one and write it out in full in the introduction.
Title: The need for and acceptability of a curriculum to train nursing and medical students in
the sexual healthcare of clients with female genital mutilation/cutting in Tanzania
Version: 1 Date: 08 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
- The researchers speak about a population of nursing students but then when describing data
analysis, they mention midwifery that had to be combined this is unclear
- The quantitative data that was collected is described clearly under data collection but not the
qualitative data please describe what was collected what was the question
- what method of data analysis was used, was it thematic or quantitative content analysis
- How did the demographic profile such as religious affiliation, sexual orientation impact the
rest of the study
- what are the recommendations and limitations of this study
Title: Factors associated with antenatal depression among women attending antenatal care at
Mubende Regional Referral Hospital: A cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 23 Feb 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript. I read the article carefully.
While it is an interesting topic to review, some concerns lead me to recommend major revisions
for this manuscript.
The written structure of the article is such that it is not very reader-friendly. Sentences and
paragraphs are very fragmented and sometimes unrelated to each other. I believe that the use of
the STROBE checklist might increase the quality of the submitted work and expedite the peer-
review and publication process of this article.
The authors should provide more detailed explanations on how to diagnose depression using the
PHQ-9 (please see PMID: 20966690, methods section).
There are also major concerns regarding English grammar, expression, and acronyms. So, I
strongly recommend that the paper be checked by a native English speaker or professional
English editing service before re-submission.
Title: Factors associated with antenatal depression among women attending antenatal care at
Mubende Regional Referral Hospital: A cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 03 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Musa Kasujja and colleagues, thank you for the submission of your interesting and well
written study for consideration for publication in BMC Women's Health. This reviewer finds
some issues that have to be addressed in order to even more improve the quality of your
manuscript.  Please add that Mubende Regional Referral Hospital is tertiary health care center.
Please delete "s"  from "s50.14" (Table 2, the 4th column entitled Percentage, the 3rd row).
Please re-write the sentence "It was determined to be 37.68%. This aligns with the worldwide
prevalence range of 15 to 65%, as reported by (4)" in "It was determined to be 37.68%. This
aligns with the worldwide prevalence range of 15 to 65%, as reported by Dadi and colleagues
(4)". I suggest you to add after this sentence something like this " The joint prevalence of any
antenatal depression across 173 studies and 182 reports evaluated by systematic review and
meta-analysis performed by Yin and colleagues was 20.7%, while the pooled prevalence of
major antenatal depression across 72 studies and 79 reports was 15.0% (Yin X, Sun N, Jiang
N, et al. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Clin Psychol Rev. 2021; 83: 101932.). The
prevalence of antenatal depression in our study is higher than worldwide average prevalence
and this can be explained by the fact that that Uganda had grown from low- to the level of a
lower-middle-income country (reference: Campos NG, Sharma M, Clark A, et al. Resources
Required for Cervical Cancer Prevention in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. PLoS One.
2016; 11(10): e0164000.), and the prevalence of antenatal depression is significantly higher
in low- or lower-middle-income countries (Roddy Mitchell A, Gordon H, Lindquist A, et
al. Prevalence of Perinatal Depression in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic
Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023 May 1;80(5):425-431.)". Study limitations
are not thoroughly discussed. For example, I suggest the authors to acknowledge that lack of
data regarding physical activity and chronic infectious diseases is limitation of the study, since
both physical activity (Petrovic D, Perovic M, Lazovic B, et al. Association between walking,
dysphoric mood and anxiety in late pregnancy: A cross-sectional study. Psychiatry Res. 2016;
246:360-363.) and chronic infectious diseases (Roddy Mitchell A, Gordon H, Lindquist A, et
al. Prevalence of Perinatal Depression in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic
Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023 May 1;80(5):425-431.) are associated with
increased prevalence of depression in pregnant and postpartum patients.