Reviewer’s report
Title: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Related to Breast Cancer Screening Among Female Health 
Care Professionals: A Cross-sectional survey
Version: 0 Date: 03 Feb 2019
Reviewer: Isaac Paz
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the article:
I have a few comments that can make your study more relevant to all readers:
1.Background: it would be best that you provide more information about breast cancer incidence 
in Saudi Arabia like incidence, mortality, stage and method of diagnosis, number of breast 
imaging centers available, existence of image guided biopsy, etc.
2.You indicated that you used a validated questionnaire, I didn't see or missed the reference to it. 
Looking at the questions to assess knowledge about breast cancer I am not sure I agreee with all  
the statements regarding breast cancer risk and detection.
3.There is no mention on the article regarding the national guidelines for breast cancer detection 
and screening. Clearly based on your questionnaire it seems that the expectation is that imaging 
screening should occur every three years. I am not sure there is data to support that there is a 
reduction in breast cancer related mortality with screening every three years.
4.Your study would be stronger if you had as a control a non healthcare worker sample to 
determine if your healthcare workers attitude towards breast cancer are any different.
5.It is not clear from your study if the lack of screening is the result of bias or lack of education of  
the healthcare workers or the absence of a national policy towards breast cancer screening and 
detection
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.
No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
Unable to assess
Are 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 further
assessment in your comments to the editors.
I recommend additional statistical review
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Acceptable
Declaration 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  this  
manuscript, 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 interests.
I 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 report
including 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