Title: A cross-sectional study of knowledge, attitudes, barriers and practices of cervical cancer
screening among nurses in selected hospitals in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa
Version: 1 Date: 01 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
The authors should be commended for the interesting topic in reproductive health have good
contributions.  I have some suggestions to improve it
1. Background: Old sources were used for more than 10 years which does not give a clear
picture of recent tends of Cervical cancer (see comment in the document). It is recommended
that authors use new development and recent research on cervical cancer.
2. Methods: Well written: The aim of the study does it fall under the methods??
3. Discussion
• The discussion is poorly written. The authors should develop the implications of the results
of this study
• This statement is not true, Several studies were already done in SA to assess the knowledge of
nurses on cervical cancer “To the research team’s knowledge, this is the first study of its kind
in South Africa, and it will hopefully add to the existing body of knowledge on nurses’ non-
compliance with cervical cancer screening guidelines and the poor cervical screening coverage
by South African communities [22–24]
• The sentence is too long. In the discussion is important to indicate the implications of findings
e.g what are the implications of this statement a limited knowledge on cervical cancer screening
“This study found nurses to have a limited knowledge on cervical cancer screening, some nurses
did not consider cervical cancer to be of public health importance, a significant proportion of
nurses who are eligible for cervical cancer screening had not yet been screened, 16.0% (19/119)
of the participants were not comfortable with recommending the cervical cancer vaccine for
girls who were younger than 16 years, and some patients were reported to not return for their
cervical cancer screening results
• This statement is not clear (vague), authours must further describe e.g weakness in terms of
training, implementation of policies and others. “The fact that only 20.8% (16/77) of professional
nurses had the adequate knowledge score of 65% suggests weaknesses in the health system”
•
•  I have reviewed this paper from a scientific/technical perspective, and while doing so have
also reviewed the language and syntax. The paper should be sent for editing.
• What is the significance of this sentence. Authours should rephrase the sentence to improve
the meaning, otherwise is a general statement which does not create an argument on the problem
under study. “First, whilst it would be unfair to expect nurses who do not practice on a subject
to have the same amount of knowledge as those who do, there are at least some basics that they
must know especially considering the duration of the cervical cancer screening policy
• The discussion is not aligned with the title e.g the discussion is based on the knowledge what
about the attitudes and barriers this ois not coming out
• What about the curriculum for nursing training. The issue of policy already addressed. “The
findings largely mirror those of other policies, such as a lack of organisational competencies
to implement care delivery models that shift care from the hospital to the community, and
ineffective monitoring, governance, training, and education when it comes to implnmenting a
comprehensive cervical cancer screening programme [26].
4. Conclusion: The conclusion is poorly written
5. Conclusion: This section should summarize the important findings and outline the novelity of
the study, whats new and what are the recommandations. and the main limitations or difficulties
encountered.
6.  I have reviewed this paper from a scientific/technical perspective, and while doing so have
also reviewed the language and syntax. The paper should be sent for editing , there are difficult
to comprehend sentences, and some typos.