JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Fertility awareness and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home
Version: 1 Date: 12 Mar 2021
Reviewer's report:
This paper undertakes an exploratory analysis of the demographics, knowledge and behaviors of
Japanese women using a mobile cycle tracking app to assist their efforts in achieving pregnancy.
The topic of study is worthwhile and brings awareness to an issue that deserves attention.
However, there are significant limitations to this paper that require revision prior to being
suitable for publication.
1. Language: English language editing services would be highly appropriate for this paper. There
are innumerable instances of grammatical typos or usage of colloquial or informal phrases that
are completely understandable as coming from a non-native English speaker. However, this
language barrier is highly distracting.
2. Is the name of the app mentioned in the manuscript?
3. What is the primary outcome of this paper? Was one defined a priori? If not, and the design
was more exploratory, that should be mentioned as such. The statistics specifically start out
mentioning age and the tests used for age. Were other tests used for other variables/analyses,
or was age a primary outcome?
4. I do have one serious concern about the way questions were worded. In the English, it is
listed as "What do you think is the upper age to have children?". In all honestly, women *can*
spontaneously get pregnant at 45+, and so this wording is very confusing. It may have been asked
more clearly in Japanese (presuming the original questionnaire was administered in Japanese).
Was there any attempt to validate the survey questions? If not, this is a substantial limitation to
this study and should be discussed.
5. Similarly, if a question is a yes/no question, such as "do you think you are infertile", I'm not
sure how the answer options of "never, almost never, etc" follow. This may again be a translation
issue but in English this question and the possible answers are not well-aligned.
In summary, I appreciate what this paper might contribute to the literature on fertility awareness,
but the current version of the manuscript requires substantial revisions. I hope they are made so
the paper can reach suitability for publication.
Title: Fertility awareness and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home
Version: 4 Date: 23 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your revision. You should increase the quality of the manuscript for the
publication.  I have some additional comments.
1.  Measures: I am afraid that the authors do not understand the meaning of Likert scales. For
example, fertility knowledge was not measured by a 4-point Likert scale according to Table2.
...questions regarding bodyweight....were "subjective.": What do you mean??
Furthermore, I cannot understand the 2-point Likert scale.
Description of the method is important. Please explain more carefully using correct words.
Please study from similar previous studies!
2.  Measures: They were "unable to find an appropriate methodology from previous reports
about enquiring about such questions."
I think there are some studies investigating the reasons for not seek medical help for fertility.
Please search previous studies and include them appropriately. This would be a critical issue in
this study. You should discuss this point in the discussion too.
3. Methods undertaken for childbearing
I think it "Methods you undertake in trying to get pregnant." Please rephrase some other
wordings.
4. Discussion, 2nd para
...may be attributed to their lifestyle changes, such as higher education....
-> .........such as delayed parenthood due to higher education, ...........?
I would like to advise the authors to insert line numbers in the next submission. It was hard to
comment on your manuscript without line numbers.
Title: Fertility awareness and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home
Version: 4 Date: 06 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
This revision demonstrates substantial improvement over the prior version. However, there are
still a number of residual issues.
(1) The ASRM definition of infertility is unprotected intercourse for 12 months for female
partners aged less than 35. The definition changes for older women (6+ months). Please account
for this discrepancy or utilize a different citation if your definition was 12+ months.
(2) I continue to have reservations about how the questions were asked, and whether the language
issues I am perceiving are due to translation or to study design. Namely, the authors mention
that they are changing the description of the question asked regarding pregnancy for women
over aged 45. Is the new language they are providing a better translation of what they actually
asked the study participants? It is critical to present the question as accurately as possible to
allow for interpretation of the findings. Obviously, at this point in the study, we cannot change
the question just for publication if it does not accurately represent what the participants were
asked. Similarly, in English, "what is the likelihood of your infertility" might be presented with
answers ranging from "highly unlikely" to "highly likely", not "never". I presume the questions
were asked appropriately in Japanese, and this needs to be stated somewhere if not already [that
the survey was administered in Japanese and questions are translated to English]. It may even be
appropriate in the table to show the questions in both Japanese AND English to allow Japanese
speakers to obtain the best interpretation of the questions.
(3) I still have concerns regarding Figure 2. Please label the x and y axes on the figure itself, not
just in the caption. Also, if the point is simply to demonstrate that there was a higher ratio of
infertility as women themselves thought they were more likely to be infertile, I'm not sure this
figure is necessary. Presumably, the longer one takes to get pregnant, the greater the chances
they start to think there is a problem. However, it would be fine to keep in if the axes are labeled
and my question in #2 regarding the answer choices are both resolved.
Title: Fertility awareness and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home
Version: 5 Date: 13 Jun 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your revision. I acknowledge your efforts, but the quality of this manuscript
would not meet the standard for publication. Your revised Methods and Results included a lot
of inconsistent and insufficient descriptions that made me confused.
1. Descriptions were not consistent throughout this manuscript. For example, you measured
medical history and menstrual information (in the method section) but did not report it in the
Results section or the tables. What is the medical history? Did you just extract ob/GYN histories
(e.g., abortion) from free-text answers?
2.  You did not present menstrual information (mentioned in lines 25, Method)  in Results or
Tables. Why did you exclude medical history and menstrual information from your multivariable
logistic regression?  If you have such information, at least you should show the summary data
in Table 1.
3. Regarding the expression "closed-ended," you should clearly show each category in the main
text too, e.g., "Participants stated their age, body weight, ...... smoking status (in three categories:
current smoker, former smoker, or never), marital status (currently single or married), ...."
Maybe it is a minor point, but I think it hard to read "first three were open-ended, and the last
two were closed...."
4. Is this sentence a mistake? "The questions on menstrual symptoms were open-ended, and
the remaining were closed-ended." I thought the sentence seemed to be reverse, "The questions
on menstrual symptoms were closed-ended and the remaining were open-ended"  because the
authors showed the options such as dysmenorrhea in the former sentence. Very confusing...
5. Lines 36, 37. "What are you doing to become pregnant?"
Is this the item to investigate the methods undertaken in trying to get pregnant? If so, you
should show it clearly in the Methods. Furthermore, you should present the rationale why such
important questions were "close-ended." It would help if you showed why you decided to present
only three options (self-timing with/without apps, or nothing).
6. Although partners' information was used in multivariable regression, the distributions or
summary data were not shown in Table 1 or anywhere.
7.  Methods line49: "between each group": what group? The level of difficulty in getting
pregnant? I could not find the corresponding results. Where did you use ANOVA?
8. Results line 6: "Methods undertaken for childbearing" remained here.
9. There was only one item for fertility knowledge. The authors should name it "knowledge
about the age-related decline of fertility" or something.
10. Results line 15: The subtitle should be "intention and behaviour for childbearing as in the
methods. The sterile period would not be included in the "methods undertaken in trying to ...."
11. Methods lines 42, 43: How you selected the options would be essential. Please cite references
here even if they were studies in Western countries.
Title: Fertility awareness and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home
Version: 6 Date: 18 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for undertaking the revisions suggested for the manuscript titled ‘Fertility awareness
and subclinical infertility among women trying to get pregnant at home.
There are a few minor suggestions to consider prior to acceptance and copy editing required.
Abstract
• In the conclusion section of the abstract, it might be best to clarify if it is “Several women from
the study” or many women generally require treatment for infertility.
Background
• In the background, line 23, suggest reword/rephrase ‘mental problems’. For example, mental
ill health.
• Line 26 – 28, sentence beginning with ‘Although these studies reported the tendency …’.
Some parts of this section require editing for clarity.
Material and methods
• Line 5 -6, sentence beginning “Second, they had the skill…”. This sentence may require editing
to clarify whether the developers of the app had academic/research experience.
• Measures:
o In the section listing the items in the survey, consider removing the descriptors “select one”,
“input number”, and “freestyle”. Freestyle could be reworded to ‘open response’.
Results
• Line 6, section “…and 582 (37.8%) of 1,541 women married women had children.” Requires
editing to clarify if 37.8% of married women in the sample had children.
• Line 13 “…Women who suffered with dysmenorrhea were 42.3% of all.” Requires editing to
clarify if 42.3% of all participants in the sample suffered with dysmenorrhea.
• Line 52 – “In Nonetheless, women’s BMI, smoking history, incidence of abortion or
miscarriage”. ‘In Nonetheless” requires editing.
Title: Title: Effect of Social marketing on the Knowledge, Attitude, and Uptake of Pap smear
among Women Residing in an Urban Slum in Lagos, Nigeria
Version: 2 Date: 28 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Hadi Tehrani
Reviewer's report:
I applaud the authors for conducting an interesting article in Nigeria. The study does have some
weaknesses in method section, and the manuscript could be helped with significantly better
editing. It also requires grammatical revised.
1. The abstract is very long, especially the background section
2. The introduction section is very long. You could summarize this section a bit more for readers.
Write about the problems, the novelty of your study, and your study goals within the introduction
3. Discuss more about your sampling strategy? The structure of your sampling is so vague and
understandable. Did you have sampling frame? how did you access to this frame
4. It was better if you could show the process of samples selection and methods using a flowchart
with consort format.
5. Explain information measurement tools. Mention their validity and reliability as well
6. Mention the possible score (range) for each scales and meaning of it so easier to readers
interpret the results.
7.
8. 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)
9. Why did not you use repeated measurement analysis. You must use it. with this method you
can test within and between effect simultaneously
10. 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
11. There are some spelling and grammatical errors in the text. Please correct them
Title: Title: Effect of Social marketing on the Knowledge, Attitude, and Uptake of Pap smear
among Women Residing in an Urban Slum in Lagos, Nigeria
Version: 2 Date: 10 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Bandit Chumworathayi
Reviewer's report:
L93: "cervical deaths" should be "cervical cancer deaths".
L358: "to decreasing" should be "to decrease".
Table4: 95%CI of DID should also be shown.
Title: Title: Effect of Social marketing on the Knowledge, Attitude, and Uptake of Pap smear
among Women Residing in an Urban Slum in Lagos, Nigeria
Version: 4 Date: 21 Jan 2022
Reviewer:  Hadi Tehrani
Reviewer's report:
Dear Editor
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this article
What I said in the previous review of this article has been well corrected
Title: IS HYSTEROSALPINGO-FOAM SONOGRAPHY (HyFoSy) MORE TOLERABLE
IN TERMS OF PAIN AND ANXIETY THAN HYSTEROSALPINGOGRAPHY (HSG)? A
PROSPECTIVE REAL-WORLD SETTING MULTICENTRE STUDY
Version: 1 Date: 23 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Shikha Jain
Reviewer's report:
This study very aptly address to the issue of pain and apprehension associated with HSG and
suggesting HyCoSy as a suitable alternative to the same. Though it highlights more towards
limitations of HSG. If the anti reflux mechanism not used and the  operator is the gynecologist,
would your findings differ, as at our place Gynecologist perform HSG.
Title: Women's Interdependence after Hysterectomy: A qualitative study based on Roy
Adaptation Model
Version: 2 Date: 07 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author/s,
The Roy Adaptation Model is an important model that can guide nursing care. First of all, I
would like to thank you for your contribution to the literature in this sense.
Although the study is outlined, there are important points that need to be developed.
These points are:
1- I suggest changing the adaptation expression in the keywords to Roy adaptation model.
2- The Roy Adaptation Model (RAM) theoretical framework is not enough. In the 4th paragraph
of the Background section, the definition and purpose of RAM should be made. It should be
noted what the four adaptation areas are. Then, it would be more appropriate if it is mentioned
that the field of interdependence adaptation is included for this study.
3- "No study was found on women's interdependency adaptation after hysterectomy especially
according to the nursing models." I suggest rewording.
Because I came across a case report that I mentioned as a source. (Kacaro#lu Vicdan A, Demirel
T. Use Of Roy Adaptat#on Model In Nurs#ng Care Follow#ng Hysterectomy. JACSD 2015;
2: 1-10.)
The statement "There was no study conducted with a qualitative method based on the mutual
adaptation field of the Roy Adaptation Model of women after hysterectomy" can be said,
perhaps. I suggest re-scanning the literature in this sense and rewriting the statement.
4- I suggest rechecking the phrase "P14S" in the table. I suggest that the education level of
participant P23 be adjusted for language. I do not understand.
5- I suggest that the participant codes at the end of the participant statements in the conclusion
section should be written in the same order. For example P6, P8, 22, etc.
In this context, the article should be rewritten.
I wish you good luck in your work.
Kind regards.
Title: Women's Interdependence after Hysterectomy: A qualitative study based on Roy
Adaptation Model
Version: 2 Date: 19 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for the opportunity to review this interesting article. This is a relevant study
that delves into the changes experienced by women after their hysterectomy in relation to other
people, especially with their children and husbands.
feelings, beliefs, psychological consequences and body changes experienced. It is a study with
methodological solidity, but it is recommended
• Check the citation format of the references, the citations with the authors' last name, followed
by the year of publication, are more frequent in the APA style.
• Define the type of qualitative study developed, and explain it briefly
• Do not give so many details of the hospitals where the study was carried out, due to the local
characteristics of the qualitative studies, certain orientations could be given on the identity of
the participants.
• In the selection criteria the sample includes all women. Don't you think that the heterogeneity
of the recruited sample can generate results that do not adequately reflect the experience of the
phenomenon? Please justify this type of recruitment
• In the quality criteria of the study, you comment that some participants confirmed the
information after transcription, what happened to the rest?
• The subtopic Supportive health providers, it is very brief should be deepened and expanded,
the information presented is too brief to consider it a subtopic in itself.
• Describe in the limitations section to what extent the results of the study could be extrapolated.
All the best
Title: Allied health and complementary therapy usage in Australian women with chronic pelvic
pain: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 28 Dec 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 suggest to discuss the importance of differential diagnosis between endometriosis and
interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome, a condition that is well known to cause chronic
pelvic pain in females and sometimes is even associated to endometriosis (the so-called “evil
twin syndrome”). Refer to: PMID: 28391486; PMID: 24807511.
- The most common clinical signs of endometriosis are menstrual irregularities, chronic pelvic
pain (CPP), dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia and infertility. Symptoms of endometriosis often affect
psychological and social functioning of patients. For this reason, endometriosis is considered
as a disabling condition that may significantly compromise social relationships, sexuality and
mental health. I truly think that this manuscript deserves at least few lines to stress this point of
paramount importance. Authors may refer to: PMID: 26319653; PMID: 28553145.
Title: Allied health and complementary therapy usage in Australian women with chronic pelvic
pain: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 04 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you to giving me the chance to review this intersting study.
Despite good overall merit I suggest to
include a paragraph regarding pelvic floor dysfunctions and sexual complaints in women with
endometriosis, in particular in patients affected by DIE (eg doi: 10.1002/uog.18924; PMID:
26668848). Please try to provide explaination of poor use of sexologist and pelvic floor specialist
in your population
Title: Increased use of analgesics in midlife women but no association with mental stress -
observations from the Prospective Population Study of Women in Gothenburg
Version: 3 Date: 15 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
This study was to conduct to investigate the prevalence of actual analgesic use (prescribed and
self-medication) and the possible association with perceived mental stress among women aged
38 and 50 years.
This topic is significant for women. However, there are some issues to solve.
- It is thought that there may be other mediating and controlling factors than the direct
relationship between mental stress and analgesic use. The consideration of other factors needs to
be clearly stated in the introduction part. For example, it is necessary to include consideration of
the relationship between the social group, smoking, alcohol consumption, leisure-time physical
activity, and amount of sleep analgesics, mental stress, and analgesic use. In the discussion part,
we discussed various other influencing factors. Please add the explanation: what factors are
relevant in the previous study and which factors were included in this study in the introduction,
and what factors could not be excluded in this analysis due to the secondary data nature in the
limitation part.
- It is necessary to rearrange the order of description in the method part. Explanation of variables
needs to be explained before data collection. Also, the variable description included in the data
collection is better to put together in the variable description part.
- you need to add a description of the variable category in table 4. For example, a social group.
Title: Increased use of analgesics in midlife women but no association with mental stress -
observations from the Prospective Population Study of Women in Gothenburg
Version: 6 Date: 17 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Neeta Ghate
Reviewer's report:
1.Following  points need to be expressed more clearly, if possible
pg 4 line 25
`Patients with chronic pain can use alcohol together with opioids as treatment (12), and pain
severity was shown to be the strongest independent predictor of sleep problems (13), which in
turn can lead to higher use of analgesic. `
suggestion-the 1st part of the sentence and 2nd part are somewhat confusing.please , if possible,
either make 2 sentences or clarify in detail.
2. Sample sizes in some of the studies quoted can be considered for mention
Title: Exploration the role of social, cultural and environmental factors in tendency of female
adolescents to smoking based on the qualitative content analysis
Version: 0 Date: 22 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Review of MS entitled: Explaining the role of social, cultural and environmental factors in
adolescent smoking tendency based on the qualitative content analysis
In this paper, the aim of the author/authors was to explain the socio-cultural and environmental
factors of smoking tendency in female adolescents.
There are some grammatical and typos errors. So, It would be better to reedit it.
Abstract:
- In the method section please write the type of study where this study had been done.
Introduction:
- I suggest postulating more social-cultural factors in risky behaviors.
Method:
- As the authors had not used maximum variation, I suggest explaining it in the limitation section.
- Please explain participants' detail in a table.
- Please prepare a method section based on consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research
(COREQ) guidelines and journal format.
Results:
- My main concern is about the results and so I suggest reanalyzing the results. One main
category with six subcategories.
- Reanalyzing the results will give a chance to explain better socio-cultural and environmental
factors in relation to smoking among females.
Discussion
- In the discussion section, more interpretations are needed.
- Following reference is suggested for explaining this phenomenon in a better manner:
Modeling the underlying predicting factors of tobacco smoking among adolescents. Iranian
journal of public health May 2012; 41(5):46-57.