Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Perceived seriousness mediates the influe nce of cervica l cancer knowledge on screening 
practices among female university students in Ghana  
 
Version: 0 Date: 14 Jan 2019  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:  
 
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research 
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?  
 
Yes - there is a clear objective  
 
 
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis pro tocols) appropriate for the 
objective?  
 
Yes - the approach is appropriate  
 
 
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow 
confidence in the results?  
 
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately  
 
 
Statistic s - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?  
 
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study  
 
 
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not 
overstated?  
 
Yes - the author's interpretation is  reasonable  
 
 
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically 
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?  
 
Probably - with minor revisions  
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: In general this is an interesting and well written manuscript.  There 
are no concerns about the research methodology, interpretation of results, and corresponding 
conclusions.  
 
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
 
--The issues raised are only minor.  Fi rst there is confusion as to how many items are included in 
the cervical cancer screening tool.  In one place it is listed as 4 and later in the paragraph it is 
listed as 8.  
 
--The authors use a Cronbach alpha to measure reliability for a measure that is th e sum of 
dichotomous outcomes.  The Kuder -Richardson may be more appropriate.  
 
--Although correlation generally satisfies the first step in mediation analysis the typical approach 
is to establish significant association via OLS.  
 
--Page 10, Line 36 should sa y 'not' significant rather than significant.  
 
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
 
Minor language issues, e.g. instead of saying significant the authors sometimes say significance.  
 
Note: This reviewer report can be downloaded - see attached pdf file.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, pleas e specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does 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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please s pecify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary 
from an organisation that may in any way gain  or lose financial ly from the 
publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2.  Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat 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.  
 
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Resear ch Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publ ication of their comments online under a Creat ive Commons Attribution License 
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for  completing the review within 
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of th e reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or 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 Co mmons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand t hat any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal