Reviewer’ s report
Title: Underestimation of pregnancy risk among women in Vietnam
Version: 0Date: 28 Jul 2019
Reviewer: Tanya Seshadri
Reviewer's report:
This paper is well written in terms of its language and cohesive flow of content. Overall this paper
appears to explore an important gap in the approach to assess contraceptive need in Vietnam. Thediscussion builds well from the background and findings and the authors state their limitationsallowing for appropriate interpretations of their findings, which is appreciated.
There are a few minor revisions that are essential:
- in the methods section - the authors do not mention the timeline for this study. They mention thatthis is embedded within a larger study however no year or timeline is stated for this or the largerstudy. This is essential.- in the findings section - line 139-140 - the authors stateWomen living in a city had four-fold greater odds of pregnancy risk underestimation relative towomen living in a town or rural area (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.0-15.9).This is the opposite of what is stated in the abstract, shown in table 2 and stated subsequently inlines 150 (findings), lines 157 and 167 (discussion). This appears to be an error. No other sucherrors were detected.
A few suggestions that could be considered at the authors' discretion:
- in the methods section - the numbers recruited in the larger study to the different groups that were
excluded for this study are in detail but confusing in text. A flow chart with these figures wouldmake it easier for the readers showing the initial 500 to the final 237 and their subsequentcategorisation.- figure 1 - offers no additional insight and provides information in text already. Suggest to deletethis
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
NoDoes 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.
YesAre 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 furtherassessment in your comments to the editors.
I recommend additional statistical review
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
AcceptableDeclaration 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 thismanuscript, 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 declare that I have no competing interestsI 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 reportincluding 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