Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Refugee women ’s experience of the resettlement process: a qualitative study  
 
Version: 0 Date: 28 Aug 2019  
 
Reviewer: Elizabeth Anderson  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thank you for your work on an interesting and understudied subject.  
 
Methods in abstract should be much more defined. Additionally, consider reframing the 
background section as your reported results are not closely related to education, access to 
healthcare, etc.  
 
(Lines seem to be double -numbered, my comments refer to the outer, single space line numbers)  
 
Please define flight  
 
If possible, please use more than one reference to support your claims (page 3, line s 35-37) 
 
The second paragraph is disjointed; please consider rearranging to make the study objective 
more prominent as the topic sentence. Can you add any background information specific to 
Sweden (e.g., numbers of refugees resettled there yearly, comparis ons of refugee health to 
general Swedish population)?  
 
Page 4, line 19, what do you mean by gatekeepers? Are they legally appointed guardians of some 
sort? This may be simply a translation issue.  
 
Page 4, line 29, if you approached 100, how are the 11 who a ccepted a convenience sample? 
Please rephrase if these are the subset who agreed to be interviewed. Additionally, I do not see 
anything here about human subjects approval, steps taken to protect privacy, consent process, 
etc. 
 
Page 4, line 46, please specif y the language(s) of interviews and cultural considerations taken 
into account. Did the interviewer have any specific experience interviewing highly vulnerable 
populations, translation, etc.? Was there a translator present? What was the gender of the 
trans lator?  
 
Did you collect anything on interviewee age, maternal status, etc.? If so, this would be a valuable 
addition.  
 
Table 1 needs significant revision. "Meaning unit" is unclear. I would recommend not including 
this as a table and instead reincorporating  this information into the text. Or, consider other ways 
to increase the amount of information in this table.  
Discussion (page 12 lines 42 -50), the argument for use of a translator is confusing and I am not 
sure (based on the current version) that I agree that a phone -based translator eliminates the bias 
introduced by power imbalances. Additionally, the high education level among your 
interviewees likely indicates that your convenience sample is not representative.  
 
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.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 specify what aspects requ ire 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:  
 
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited  
 
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 financially fro m 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 a re 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 y ou 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 a ny, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
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 Acc ess 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 in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal