JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Effectiveness of physical therapy interventions in women with dyspareunia: A systematic
review and meta-analysis
Version: 2 Date: 10 Apr 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. This systematic review with meta-
analysis brings important information on the subject that can help both clinicians and new
research in the area.
I have a few comments about the manuscript:
1. Throughout the text, different terms are used to refer to pelvic floor muscle training as pelvic
diaphragm training, perineal training. I suggest reviewing the entire text and using the term
suggested by ICS/IUGA: pelvic floor muscle training.
2. In the abstract, modify the term “systematic search” for systematic review”
3. The citations in support of prevalence of female sexual dysfunction (FSD), while by no means
inappropriate, are not especially robust. There are much larger epidemiologic studies, with more
subjects and accounting for the significance of bother in making a formal diagnosis of FSD,
that would be appropriate here (e.g. the PRESIDE study from the USA, or the NATSAL data
from the UK.)
4.  “Sexological physiotherapy” is not a common term. I suggest modifying.
5. I suggest improving the discussion about the methodological quality of the included studies.
6. Indicate the reference number in table citations.
Title: Effectiveness of physical therapy interventions in women with dyspareunia: A systematic
review and meta-analysis
Version: 2 Date: 11 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you very much for writing a valuable article.
I have several comments on your manuscript :
ABSTRACT
page2 line 32: design- The term systematic review is more common.
page 2 line 34: The Jadad scale  is an old criterion for evaluating the quality of interventional
studies. You can use newer tools for measuring the quality of interventional studies, such as
Cochran's risk of bias tool.
page 2 line 35: It is better to write about the method of data analysis in the method. Please
provide more details about the methodology in the abstract of this manuscript.
page 3 line 49: Keywords should be written based on MesH.
METHODS
page 5 line 104: It is better to use the hand searching  technique (reference list) in addition to
searching in the mentioned databases.
page 5: Were Gray literature such as papers presented at national seminars and congresses,
national reports and related dissertations also reviewed? explain it.
page 6: study selection section- It didn't matter to you how dyspareunia was diagnosed in
different studies? For example, it may be based on self-report, DSM-IV criteria, standard
questionnaire, etc., which increases the heterogeneity between studies.
It should be stated in the inclusion criteria that at least how long they have been in a relationship
with their sexual partner ?!
It is necessary to make the study inclusion criteria more complete. For example, it should be
stated that his husband does not have a sexual disorder and etc.
What is your outcome measurement tool should be mentioned in the inclusion criteria?
page 7 line 140-142: You should explain more about the quality assessment tool and citation
to the relevant reference. Were the studies with low quality excluded from your study (based
on risk of bias)? Explain it.
DISCUSSION
page 17: What was the strengths of your study?
Title: Time Trend of Global Uterine Cancer Burden: An Age-period-cohort Analysis from 1990
to 2019 and Predictions in a 25-year Period
Version: 1 Date: 04 May 2023
Reviewer:  Han Thi Ngoc Nguyen
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for such careful consideration of comments. I believe that the manuscript
should be ready for publication.
Title: Time Trend of Global Uterine Cancer Burden: An Age-period-cohort Analysis from 1990
to 2019 and Predictions in a 25-year Period
Version: 1 Date: 02 Jun 2023
Reviewer:  Bhaskar Tiwary
Reviewer's report:
The paper has been well written and explores a very important topic that is prevailing in women’s
particularly during post-menopausal phase. The estimation of incidence will also help public
health officials and policy makers in making customized interventions to control the global
burden of disease and prevent mortality and morbidity caused due to uterine cancer. There are
certain queries/suggestions which I would like to know from authors before accepting this paper.
1. Introduction is bit small which has limited the flow of information in it. Also, the rationale
is not justified. Kindly work on it.
2. Include findings of global evidence related to uterine cancer adequately.
3. In the introduction, draw region and country wise findings which has high  burden of
uterine cancer. Also include this study from India with its relevance https://link.springer.com/
article/10.1007/s10708-021-10464-9
4. In Methods, data source please mention the IRB number.
5. I would like to know the reason that authors have arranged the incidence and population data
into successive 5-year periods.
6. Why did the authors preferred using Nordpred package in R and not other method for
forecasting?
7. Any specific reason for considering time trend up to 2044?
8. In conclusion, authors have written more measures and efforts must be put. Kindly recommend
what kind of measures and efforts is required and strengthen it.
9. Any region-specific recommendation that the authors would like to provide?
10. In abstract, re-read the first sentences of background and conclusion. It doesn’t make any
sense to me. Be specific for both sections to what has been already known what this study has
found.
Title: Prevalence and determinants of maternal near miss in Ethiopia:  A systematic review and
meta-analysis, 2015-2023
Version: 1 Date: 15 Apr 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for referring this paper to me for peer reviewing. I would like to skip the
writing comments to my colleagues and concentrate on the methodology and results obtained
by the author.
Metanalysis is not a single test. rather a bunch of types that are increased yearly to a wide variety
of types. some of those examples include odd ratio, risk ratio, standardized mean difference,
proportional type, regression coefficient type, AUC for ROC and other less used types.
The type of metanalysis used by the author is most likely of the proportional type?  or prevalence
type? Yet the way in which his data are arranged are not clear to which type of metanalaysis
the author has used. In addition, The total number as well as the number of cases with positive
outcome should be put in front of each study or survey.
As a matter of fact I left some confused by the author tables. Neither I could verify their
calculation nor their exact type.
I suggest that the author should rewrite the statistical methods again stating exactly which type
of metanalysis the author has used. In addition all the tables should include the total number as
well as the number of positive cases in front of each study.
I will appreciate greatly if the author understand fully that I am not refusing his study. Rather I
am suggesting some improvement on his tables should be done so that we can verify his results
based on the references he enlisted in his study
My best regards indeed
Wisam Akram
Title: Prevalence and determinants of maternal near miss in Ethiopia:  A systematic review and
meta-analysis, 2015-2023
Version: 1 Date: 25 Apr 2023
Reviewer:  Waleed Arif Tawfeeq
Reviewer's report:
Dear Sir
Thanks for such scientific approach in tackling such important maternal aspect related to
pregnancy delivery and postpartum period of reproductive health.
Few comments were written on the attached file
The paper near MORE explanation on the finding  with conclusions and recommendations to
be considered
Title: Prevalence and determinants of maternal near miss in Ethiopia:  A systematic review and
meta-analysis, 2015-2023
Version: 3 Date: 27 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for diverting this article to me for peer reviewing. I remember the first
draft diverted to me .
Apparently huge changes have been done to improve the quality as well as the writing style of
the article was conducted by the author. In my humble opinion it is quite suitable for publishing
now. Many thanks again for re directing this article to me.
Title: Prevalence and determinants of maternal near miss in Ethiopia:  A systematic review and
meta-analysis, 2015-2023
Version: 7 Date: 29 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the authors for their kind response to the  report
and their diligent efforts in addressing the concerns raised. The revisions made to the manuscript
have greatly improved its clarity, structure, and scientific rigor. The authors have successfully
incorporated the suggested changes, resulting in a more comprehensive and insightful study.
The manuscript now effectively presents the prevalence and determinants of maternal near miss
in Ethiopia, contributing significantly to the field of maternal health research. I commend the
authors for their dedication and hard work in completing the manuscript editing process. It has
been a pleasure to review this revised version, and I believe the study will make a valuable
contribution to the scientific community.
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 1 Date: 04 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear  Author(s),
Thank you for this study  first of all. This gynecologic procedure is widely used, but it has
complications as well. So it is an important clinical issue to study. But some points should be
clarified.
The study design is not clear enough. Is it retrospectively designed ? It has been said but, is
rbFGF routinely used in your clinics ? And did you choose the patients among them ? It makes
a little confusion about the design. And is the control group has no intervention with any other
procedure for bleeding ? It should be more valuable if rbFGF could be compared with other
hemosthatic procedures or substances. Because a doctor could not have the patient without
treatment and vice versa, maybe the spontenous hemostasis exist. But you could explain what
has been done for the bleeding patients in the study and control group. Please explain the study
design a little bit detailed.  MVM -bleeding calculation shoul also be described in detail.
Also it would be more valuable if the wound healing could be demonstrated by tissue level with
the hemosthatic  effects.
But nevertheless the study could have an effect in this literature also with  the long term results
as preterm delivery and abortions  as you mentioned in the manuscript.
The reference list should be written according to the journal's rules.
You could check some recent  articles in this journal for this arrangement .
Table headlines should be in the same line (e.g. Table 1.......) and please  write 'p values'  in
italic form.
Thanks and I wish a successful academic life .
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 1 Date: 06 May 2023
Reviewer:  Andrea Etrusco
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled " Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic
Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision
Procedure" which falls within the aim of the Journal.
In my opinion, this topic analyzed is interesting enough to attract readers’ attention.
The abstract is very clear, well structured and highlights the results obtained in the study. Tables
and figures are clear and interesting.
Although the manuscript can be considered already of good quality, I would suggest the
following recommendations:
-  I suggest round of language revision, in order to correct few typos and improve readability;
- It would be interesting to discuss the possible role of recombinant bovine basic fibroblast
growth factor in the persistence and / or recurrence of cervical pathologies. Authors may better
discuss this point, taking to account this recent article PMID: 36992282
- Authors could extend the discussion by evaluating the possible relationship between
recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor after cervical loop electrosurgical excision
procedure and obstetrical outcomes. I would be glad if the authors discuss this important point,
referring to PMID: 33140628
Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and completed. Considering all these
points, I think it could be of interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority
to be published after minor revisions.
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 1 Date: 08 May 2023
Reviewer:  Pinar Solmaz Hasdemir
Reviewer's report:
Weng C. et al. reported an original manuscript named ‘Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic
Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision
Procedure’. Although the subject of the manuscript is interesting, there are several questions to
answer before publication. Here are my specific comments;
- The manuscript is reported to be a ‘retrospective study’ but the authors claimed that the study
subjects were replied some questions about the amount of their bleeding and the complaints of
infection and dysmenorrhea 3 and 6 weeks postoperatively. How was it possible?
- Was rbFGF routinely used after LEEP procedures in the study hospital? If yes, why?
- In the design of the study (line 73-74), why the patients were asked to use of rbFGF for
a retrospective study? And why the study subjects were followed for 6 weeks if it is not a
prospective study? (line 85-86)
- Was the indication for the LEEP procedure same for all of the cases (CIN 1, CIN 2 or CIN 3 ??)?
- Was there any difference between vaginal infection rates for both group of patients?
- The possible mechanism of action of rbFGF would be explained in detail in discussion section.
- A well-planned prospective case-controlled study on this subject would be more interesting.
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 1 Date: 12 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
In my opinion, the analyzed topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. This
study examined a hemostatic effect of the use of topical rbFGF in patients who underwent a
loop electrosurgical excision procedure.
I think that the abstract of this article is very clear and well structured.
In my opinion, the discussion could be studied in depth and extended. Maybe, the outcomes of
these patients who underwent this procedure should be analyzed. In particular, I suggest this
article to get deeper in the topic: PMID: 33514481. Because of these reasons, the article should
be revised and completed. Considering all these points, I think it could be of interest for the
readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority to be published after minor revisions
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 3 Date: 02 Jun 2023
Reviewer:  Andrea Etrusco
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled " Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic
Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision
Procedure”, topic interesting enough to attract readers' attention.
The quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made. The methodology
is accurate, and results are supported by data analysis. The discussions are clear and
comprehensive. References are relevant to the search
Considering all these points, I think it could be of interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it
deserves the priority to be published.
Title: Efficacy of Recombinant Bovine Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor to Reduce Hemorrhage
after Cervical Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
Version: 3 Date: 09 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I have read the author's revision according to the reviewers' comments and I think the revision is
enough and detailed as mentioned. So, it is appropriate for acceptance. I hope it will be a useful
manuscript for the clinical area, as well.
Kind regards
Title: Impact of Individual and Environmental Factors on Academic Performance of Pregnant
Adolescent
Version: 2 Date: 28 Apr 2023
Reviewer:  Innocent A. Nwosu
Reviewer's report:
The article has prospect of being published. However, it requires some adjustments and
corrections. These can be seen in the attached document.
The title of the article should be adjusted to read - "Implications of Individual and Environmental
Factors on Academic Achievement of Pregnant Adolescent". The abstract is good but the
methodology requires improvement. Mention the name of the author(s) that forms part of a
sentence. The introduction is good.
Many things are muddled up here. This sub-section should be separated into Research Design
and Population of the Study. The author(s) did not mention the actual design used for the study.
They only mention the sample size without mention the real population of the study from which
the 400 participants were selected.
It important that authors provide the formula used and how the calculation was done. On which
population (number) did they base their calculation. You cannot derive 384 from nothing.
What is the instrument used for this study? Does it has a name?
There is confusion here. Are the authors measuring the extent the pregnant teenagers are
integrated into the school system or were they measuring the academic performance of such
girls. With this, the title of the paper should be adjusted to incorporate this.
The authors refused to align some of the results to previous studies. Why? some of the previous
studies mentioned did not related to the results presented.
Does academic integration mean the same thing as academic achievement? These terms must
be clarified right from the title.
The conclusion is not properly situated. There is need to conclude based on the original
objectives of the study.
The references are okay.
Title: Impact of Individual and Environmental Factors on Academic Performance of Pregnant
Adolescent
Version: 6 Date: 28 Jun 2023
Reviewer:  Innocent A. Nwosu
Reviewer's report:
You have effected most of the corrections. However, you refused to mention the name of the
actual instrument you used for the study. You said the items were adopted from some where,
these items are items of what? It the instrument questionnaire, FGD guide or interview guide?
You should also run English language check on your paper to ensure that all grammatical errors
are eliminated.
Title: Implementation strategies, facilitators, and barriers to scaling up and sustaining post
pregnancy family planning, a mixed-methods systematic review
Version: 0 Date: 15 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Rosalba Company-Córdoba
Reviewer's report:
General comment: I would suggest to modify the person used to write along the article to an
impersonal mode. “WE” has been very used along the article.
Abstract: methods section- please include the database consulted. Which tool did you use to
assess the risk of bias? This should be included here.
Introduction:
I would kindly recommend to try to write the introduction in a more fluent way since the
paragraphs don´t seem to be connected with each other.
Sentence number 1 in page 5 should be cited.
Types of intervention: I would suggest to properly describe the approaches of scaling-up
selected.
Barriers to and facilitators
In line 2: first the definition and then the acronym
Type of studies: in case information can not be clearly extracted, would you ask to authors about
the information you need or it is a criteria, to be directly excluded?
Management of search results: which authors took part in this part of the review process?. This
section needs to be more detailed.
Study selection: the form you have developed should be more detailed.
Appraisal of confidence: page 11 line 4 -> please define the number of the table
Methodological quality. There is no enough information about methodological quality.
Researchers’ reflexibility: I am not sure if this section is suitable in this case since this is a
review, you are known to have follow the steps in a reflexively way. The information it has been
added in this section could be deducted from pieces of information included in other sections
along the article.
Results : The figure 1 should be bigger .
Methodological quality: please insert the MMAT reference in this section.
Findings of the review:
I would suggest to include a list of the include articles with references as well as to add some
information about these studies
Factors influencing scaling up of PPFP: I would suggest to present this information by using
another format (e.g., table).
Discussion: since you have conducted a complete mixed- methods review of the topic of
interest, the reader should expect to have an extended analysis of the findings regarding previous
literature in the discussion. Then, I would suggest to offer a more detailed analysis in the
discussion section.
Limitations: The first line of this section is not understandable. There are some misplaced full
stops. Please try to be more fluent to link paragraphs in this section.
List of abbreviations:  You have used more abbreviations than the 2 included in the “List of
abbreviations”. Please include all of them.
Title: Implementation strategies, facilitators, and barriers to scaling up and sustaining post
pregnancy family planning, a mixed-methods systematic review
Version: 0 Date: 29 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
I have examined the manuscript and found that it addresses an interesting and useful topic
related to scaling up and sustaining preventive health care programmes, specifically post-
pregnancy family planning. The authors followed an appropriate and rigorous methodology
in their systematic literature review, using Cochrane guidelines and reporting with the use of
PRISMA 2020.
However, the manuscript could benefit from further work to make it more concise and
intelligible to policymakers and family planning service planners. Specifically, a rewrite that
focuses on brevity and clarity, while reducing unnecessary details, would be ideal. This would
involve streamlining the text by removing superfluous information and jargon, and organizing
it in a logical and concise manner to highlight key findings and recommendations in a clear and
accessible format.
In regard to the Methodology section:
-  I recommend that the authors add a paragraph before listing and elaborating each criterion to
consider the studies for the review. This paragraph should explain the reasons for selecting these
criteria over others. Additionally, the criterion "Phenomena of interest" should be relabelled or
explained more clearly to avoid confusion.
- Regarding the sources used for literature search, it is not clear how unpublished studies were
located, as no search strategy is defined. It would be beneficial to explain this in more detail to
ensure clarity for the intended audience.
Finally, to make the findings of the reviewed studies more understandable to policymakers and
service planners, the Sure Framework should be briefly explained and discussed.