Reviewer's report
Title:Mammography screening: views from women and primary care physicians
in Crete
Version: 1Date:24 January 2008
Reviewer: Tsu Yin Wu
Reviewer's report:
BMC Womenâ##s Health Review
Title: Mammography screening: views from women and primary care physicians
in Crete
Overall: Understanding the perceptions about mammography screening from
both women and physiciansâ## perceptive is important. The research findings
will strengthen the literature to provide evidence that is culturally-appropriate for
promoting mammography screening in this population.
1. Is the question posed by the authors new and well defined?
It will be helpful if authors can state the research questions clearly and also
provide a list of the questions they used in the interview.
2. Are the methods appropriate and well described, and are sufficient details
provided to replicate the work?
The research method that authors selected is an appropriate one, however, the
authors did not provide adequate details for data analysis (of interview data).
Also, the way that the results presented is not the traditional format reporting for
qualitative data. If the analysis was done using content analysis, then the authors
need to present the themes and how the themes were identified, it needs to be
clearly described in the analysis.
3. Are the data sound and well controlled?
The authors used a convenience sample and how the sample selected was not
clear. It is also questionable how the results can be generalized to the population
in Crete.
4. Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data
deposition?
The results section needs to be improved. The demographic table should include
the aggregate data instead of individual data.
5. Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported
by the data?
Overall, the discussion was well written. Several important issues came up
related to data collection, including why the authors did not explore more (during
the interview) in specifics of what kind of mammography women participants
were referring to, i.e., screening vs. diagnostics. The barriers may be very
different with the purpose of the screening. Also, it will be interesting to compare
the differences and similarity between the perceptions of womenâ##s and
physiciansâ## perceptions on the same question, e.g., barriers to mammography
and how the intervention can be designed using such findings. Also the findings
will be strengthened if the findings can be presented corresponding with
womenâ##s demographics. For example, women who report the absence of
symptoms as a reason for not having mammography, are these responses from
women who had or not had mammogram in the past or are these responses are
from older vs. younger age groups, etc.
6. Do the title and abstract accurately convey what has been found?
Yes
7. Is the writing acceptable?
It needs editorial assistance to improve the readability throughout the text.
The comments should be considered under the category of â##Major
Compulsory Revisions (which the author must respond to before a decision on
publication can be reached).â##
Decision: Recommended for publication once these comments are appropriately
addressed.