JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: MEDIATION OF THE EFFECT OF PRENATAL MATERNAL SMOKING ON
TIME TO NATURAL MENOPAUSE IN DAUGHTERS BY BIRTHWEIGHT-FOR-
GESTATIONAL-AGE Z-SCORE AND BREASTFEEDING DURATION: ANALYSIS OF
TWO UK BIRTH COHORTS BORN IN 1958 AND 1970
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2024
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)?
No - there are minor issues
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) 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
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Not sure - I am not able to assess the statistics in this 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: Using dat from two British surveys of the past, authors analysed
the association of prenatal maternal smoking with time to natural menopause in daughter with
potential mediation role of birthweight and breastfeeding. The manuscript is presented well and
there are few revisions to consider.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Title: Indicate it is secondary analysis
Background:
I suggest to use the similar language (i.e. mediation) in both abstracts and background to write
objectives.
Methods:
Were these data in public domain? How did authors access these data?
Authors need to describe a little more about these studies.
Results:
Table 1 caption: which characteristics?
Discussions: Authors need to shorten the limitations and strengths sections.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
None
Title: MEDIATION OF THE EFFECT OF PRENATAL MATERNAL SMOKING ON
TIME TO NATURAL MENOPAUSE IN DAUGHTERS BY BIRTHWEIGHT-FOR-
GESTATIONAL-AGE Z-SCORE AND BREASTFEEDING DURATION: ANALYSIS OF
TWO UK BIRTH COHORTS BORN IN 1958 AND 1970
Version: 3 Date: 23 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (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 protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used 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 - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The presented evaluation study estimates the extent to which the
effect of maternal smoking during pregnancy on time to natural menopause in daughters is
mediated by birthweight-for-gestational-age z-score (a marker of fetal growth rate, hereafter
birthweight z-score) and breastfeeding duration.  It provides results that are of great importance
to public health.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Conclusions;  I sugest a smal correction -Our research found that birthweight-for-gestational-
age-z-score and breastfeeding together mediated an estimated just 14% of the effect of prenatal
exposure to maternal cigarette smoking on the timing of menopause in female offspring."
Title: A Perinatal Psychiatry Access Program to Address Rural and Medically Underserved
Populations Using Telemedicine
Version: 3 Date: 06 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
This report highlights the state-wide deployment of the Moms IMPACTT [Improving Access
to Perinatal Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Care Through Telehealth and Tele-
mentoring] in South Carolina. This is a fantastic program that offers promising answers to the
difficult questions facing providers across the country given scale and reach. This reviewer
commends the authors for their work.
Comments offered to improve the manuscript for ease of readership and emphasis of impact as
well as offer an opportunity to follow the authors lead. The manuscript is overall well-written.
That said, it is long and would recommend trimming some of the 2.5 page introduction, etc. with
more of dedicated text applied to the “how” and “what” rather than as much of the “why.”
1. The resources applied to this program appear relatively light, e.g 0.3 FTE psychiatrist. What
was the utilization of the psychiatrist relative to the coordinators? Is this enough to manage the
call burden? And, it was not entirely clear on the existing workflow or triage of calls. Could the
authors provide a schematic or Figure for workflow of incoming calls? If one were to replicate
this program elsewhere, what and how would could it be achieved and/or resourced?
2. What happened after the initial encounter? Were there “repeated” calls for the same individual
or was there a transition/transfer of care to local services? What was this success? Can the authors
expand on the outcome data?
3. Within the postpartum window, what was the distribution of call timing? 0-6 weeks, 6
weeks-12 mo? Was there a waning utilization further remote from delivery? Is this a program
that should be targeted during outreach for a particular time?
4. Although program use was reported as widespread across the state, the uptake was noted as
a limitation. Where was utilization less? And can the authors postulate on why?
5. Table 3 is rich with information and would recommend the authors expand on this data.
What were the results of “substance use” management? Transition of care or opioid use disorder
management via telehealth, i.e. was buprenorphine induction started in this process? Was Narcan
recommended or ordered?
6. Outcome of event by provider incoming call would also be helpful—i.e. how did management
recommendations differ for pediatricians vs obstetricians? Nursing vs provider? Etc.
7. Were there recommendations for admission to the hospital? Or better yet, were
hospitalizations “avoided” thus offering a reason to provide ongoing support for the program as
a preventative health model—meaning reduction in admission to the hospital as a cost-saving
mechanism?
8. There were a substantial number of safety concerns and/or intimate partner violence entries
—what was the outcome of these events?
Title: A Perinatal Psychiatry Access Program to Address Rural and Medically Underserved
Populations Using Telemedicine
Version: 3 Date: 30 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Cara English
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript delivers a thorough description of the background and context for this work,
including an overview of the current health policy and funding challenges in South Carolina
as well as specific inequities in access to care for the state's most vulnerable populations and
medically underserved areas. Results were clear and were delivered in a well-organized manner,
making it clear to the reader which benefits emerged from this study, including state policy,
funding, and workforce development initiatives. If there were results that surprised the authors,
considering their deep knowledge of the patient and provider populations, it would be valuable
to hear this; however, the results stand strong as they have been written. Kudos to the authors
and relevant affiliated departments and community partners for this critical work, which will be
an enormous value to others pursuing similar work in other states and nations.
Title: Uncommon Metastatic Journey: Unusual Breast Metastases of Medullary Thyroid
Carcinoma: a case report
Version: 1 Date: 04 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
It's a very rare case report
1.in case of metastatic medullary carcinoma of thyroid  calcitonin levels should be raised
2.whole body PET scan will ease your diagnosis Dialama
Title: Uncommon Metastatic Journey: Unusual Breast Metastases of Medullary Thyroid
Carcinoma: a case report
Version: 1 Date: 12 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Helen Trihia
Reviewer's report:
The text needs editing. Some points I would like to address, are the followig:
- In Abstract, better say : 24months after treatment, instead of '24 months of the end of treatment'
- Introduction: better 'accounting' instead of 'accounts '
- In Case Report, better say: the case concerns, instead of 'It is about'
- Better 'the pathological diagnosis was' instead of 'pathology concluded'
- When you say 'multifocal', can you also address if it was in one (right or left) or in both lobes
(?bilateral)?
- Instead of 'the patient has been followed up since ', could you be more specific, for how long
the patient was followed up?, preferably not mentioning dates 'March 2022, etc'
- ACE: explain
- If I can understand correctly, after the appearance of the first lump in the breast by ultrasound,
no further investigation was undertaken for a year(???). All lumps in the breast should be further
examined by FNA (very simple examination) or FNB, even if the radiological findings are in
favor of benignity. In this case it was mandatory to be further examined, as it was a known
clinical history of thyroid medullary carcinoma. It is also well known that metastases are usually
circumscribed lesions, that can mimic benign lesions, as fibroadenomas.
- You can also describe the radiological findings in more detail.
- In Discussion: better say 'thyroid medullary carcinoma originates from c-cells' instaed of
'...originates in the thyroid C cells'
- Why are you referring in the annual incidence of the disease in France, specifically?
- The diagnostic challenge in differentiating primary fro secondary neuroendocrine tumors in
the breast, it is more stressed by the fact, that breast carcinomas can show neuroendocrine
differentiation. In this case, the immunohistochemical stain for GATA-3, is positive.
- TTF1, can be posotive in neuroendocrine carcinomas of the lung and of mammary origin.
That's why you have to erase the sentence 'TTF1 positivity points to thyroid origin'. Calcitonin
positivity and the known clinical history are in favor of thyroid origin.
- In Fig.1, you can write 'invading the non-neoplastic mammary stroma' instead of 'healthy
mammary stroma'
Title: Uncommon Metastatic Journey: Unusual Breast Metastases of Medullary Thyroid
Carcinoma: a case report
Version: 2 Date: 09 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Helen Trihia
Reviewer's report:
Dear Sirs, most changes have been implemented. Nevertheless, some minor changes, mostly
grammatical/structural need to be addressed, like the following:
- Abstract (Line 32). .....derived from thyroid C. Correct to C-cells
- We report the case (Line 34). You could say: We report a case
- The breast lesion was considered as benign (line 36). Omitt 'as'
- Key words (Line 47): medullar. Correct to medullary
- Case report. ...a family history of breast cancer in the mother (Line 58). You can omit 'in the
mother'.
- (Line 61). multifocal mixed carcinoma. ?mixed follicular-medullary
- (Line 62). 'little differentiated vesicular contingent', makes no sense. Also, sixteen of the forty
isolated cervical lymph nodes were metastatic. You can say: were involved by the carcinoma.
Also, instead of: the patient had adjuvant radiotherapy, you can say 'underwent'
- (Line 65). Omit 'without secondary lesion'.
- Line 67-69. Needs editing
- Line 70. Correct 'to the left side', 'were classified'. Calcitonin levels were 'raised' (instead of
were high)
- (Line 72). 'amorphous eosinophilic deposits', do you mean ?amyloid. If yes, this is
characteristic of medullary carcinoma and you don't see it in breast carcinoma.
- (Line 74). Pathological concluded. Correct to The findings were in favour of secondary
medullary carcinoma (in the breast).
- (Line 77). Instead of medullary cancer, correct  to madullary carcinoma.
- (Line 78). These tumours are uncommon, constituing 1-2% of all thyroid cancers.
-( Line 79). Better say: ... thyroid carcinomas are hereditary, manifestating in a familial form ,
with peak incidence at younger patients (mean age 35), while sporadic forms have (show) a peak
incidence at 40-60 years (you can keep the decades as written)
- (Line 86). Instead 'the second instance' correct to 'case' (case report). Correct to  'of medullary
thyroid carcinoma metastatic to the breast, instead of 'thyroid cancer metastasis in breast'.
-   Line 89. Correct to the 'The time interval', instead of 'The time...'
- (Line 97). positivity to c-cell origin of thyroid, correct to: origin from thyroid medullary
carcinoma. Also if amyloid present, points to medullary carcinoma.
- (Line 103). You can omit 'critical'
- (Line 106). You can omit 'such as radiotherapy'
- Finally, line 108, you can say: As demonstrated in this case, clinical history, multiplicity of
breast lesions and elevated calcitonin levels..... Omit 'the presence of atypical cells'
(It is well known that serum calcitonin correlates with tumor burden  and can be used for
monitoring of recurrence of the disease)
Title: Uncommon Metastatic Journey: Unusual Breast Metastases of Medullary Thyroid
Carcinoma: a case report
Version: 5 Date: 19 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Helen Trihia
Reviewer's report:
Dear Sirs, your manuscript has been successfully edited according to recommendations. Some
minor corrections are also made:
- In Case report, line 11, instead of upper-external, write upper-outer and instead of lower-
internal, write lower-inner.
Line 14, instead of 'Breast microbiopsy' write 'Breast biopsy'. I am not sure what you mean
by 'aroid cells'? Instead of 'hyperchromatic nuclei' you could say 'nuclei with coarse chromatin
pattern'
-Page 3, Fig.2, correct H&E instead HE.Also Fig.2 (A), I think its H&E x25
- At the end of page 4, 'The pathological similarity between tumour cells from a primary breast
tumour' I would add '...with neuroendocrine differentiation' and 'secondary thyroid carcinoma'
I would add 'thyroid medullary carcinoma'.
- I would add 'Amorphous eosinophilic material (or deposits)'
-Page 5, line 5, add 'p' positivity, instead of 'ositivity'
Title: Predicting the Risk of High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk
HPV Typing in Changsha China
Version: 0 Date: 23 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Michael Odida
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript covers an important area of women health. The manuscript has been well written.
However, in the  methods section, 2.4 Statistical analysis, is empty. Some comment please.
In the conclusion, the word 'demonstrate' should read "demonstrated"
Title: Predicting the Risk of High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk
HPV Typing in Changsha China
Version: 0 Date: 24 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
Predicting the Risk of Low-grade and High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on
High-risk HPV Typing in Changsha China
By Xiao Y et al., ……….
The authors have performed a retrospective analysis of HPV typing from 158 565 women.
Colposcopy was performed directly for the positive cases of HPV16/18. For other high risk
positive cases a ThinPrep cytology (19707 women) test (TCT) was performed. Also among the
HPV positive TCT tested women colposcopy was done if an intraepithelial lesions was detected.
The sensitivity and specificity for detecting lesions in TCT and colposcopy were calculated
based on the positive results of HPV typing. Correlation models were established between HPV
typing and TCT and colposcopy. A risk level of pathogenicity was estimated for each high-
risk HPV type by accounting for the effect of infection rate. The overall prevalence of HPV
infection was 17.89%, and the top types was 52 (4.44%), 58 (2.10%), 53 (1.96%), 81 (1.85%),
42 (1.75%), 16 (1.44%).   The most prominent high-risk HPV16/18 did not show higher degree
of pathogenicity compared with other high-risk types after the infection rates were discounted.
It is proposed to individualize the screening strategy according to the prevalence of high-risk
HPV types in a particular region, and colposcopy should be performed directly for the positive
cases of HPV52/58/53/16/18, in order to increase the efficiency of cervical cancer screening.
This is an retrospective study in which various HPV types, including 16, 18, 52, 58, 53, 42..)
appear to share a similar pathogenicity when corrected for infection rates. There appear to be
several issues of concern especially the lack of follow up data for a more stringent disclosure
on the progression risk into CIN2+ for these various HPV types. Normally, one would expect a
huge number of HPV co-infections, but there is no discussion of this topic in this manuscript. It
is felt important as  that might potentially affect some of the results with respect sensitivity and
specificity.  Also, the term sensitivity and specificity for the presence of a specific HPV type in
a clinical lesion is somewhat odd in this manuscript, although explained in Methods section.
Title: Predicting the Risk of High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk
HPV Typing in Changsha China
Version: 0 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript entitled “Predicting the Risk of Low-grade and High-grade Precancerous
Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk HPV Typing in Changsha China” is deemed to be of high
quality and interest.
I would suggest the following recommendations:
- I suggest correcting a few typographical errors and revising the language.
- Considering the topic of this study and the state of the art in literature, It would be interesting
to discuss how the persistence HPV-infection and recurrence of cervical dysplasia affect key
points of cervical cancer development. I would be glad if the authors discuss this point with:
“State of the art on HPV-related cervical lesions, Tullio Golia D’Augè, Ilaria Cuccu, Andrea
Etrusco, Antonio D’Amato, Antonio Simone Laganà, Ottavia D’Oria, Giorgio Bogani, Violante
Di Donato, Ludovico Muzii, Andrea Giannini, doi: 10.36129/jog.2024.16.
- I suggest adding recent evidence about lower genital tract lesions and the potential role of
various therapeutic strategies, such as the HPV vaccination. I would be glad if the authors discuss
this important point, referring to PMID: 37978580
Considering these minor revisions and after improving these points, the manuscript could have
the priority to be published.
Title: Predicting the Risk of High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk
HPV Typing in Changsha China
Version: 0 Date: 28 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
A New Method for Predicting the Risk of Low-Grade and High-Grade Precancerous Cervical
Lesions Based on High-Risk HPV Typing
The authors suggest that personalized screening strategies should be developed based on the
prevalence of high-risk HPV types in specific regions. For HPV52/58/53/16/18 positive cases,
direct colposcopy should be performed to improve the efficiency of cervical cancer screening.
This idea is interesting and thought-provoking. However, the following issues need to be
addressed or revised for the manuscript to meet publication standards.
Formatting Issues
1. There are spacing issues between some words. For example, in the conclusion section of the
abstract, there is an extra space between "and" and "colposcopy." There is also an extra space
after "75%" in the third line of the Introduction. Additionally, there is a missing space before
the citation (14, 15). Please carefully check for such issues throughout the article.
2. The citation numbering is incorrect. After citation 9, the numbering skips directly to 11
through 15, and then it goes back to 10. Please renumber the references.
3. There is some overlapping text in Figure 1. It is recommended to adjust the layout to present
the data more clearly.
4. There is no content following section 2.4 Statistical analysis. Was this part accidentally
omitted?
Other Issues
1. The article draws conclusions about the differences in HPV type detection rates based on the
results from the Changsha region and a comparison with Shanghai. It states that "differences in
detection rates of HPV types are due to different regions, periods, and sampling methods." Is
this conclusion accurate? The sample of region may be too less.
2. If a patient tests positive for HPV, they will already know whether the HPV type is high-risk or
low-risk. The article states, "Cervical cancer screening was conducted for women of appropriate
age in Changsha. If the HPV test was positive, cytological examinations were conducted to
assess the risk of cervical lesions and determine whether colposcopy, biopsy, or treatment was
needed." What is the significance of assessing the risk? If it's high-risk, wouldn't that already
indicate a high risk? Shouldn't treatment be administered immediately? The article does not
explain this clearly, and the Introduction also lacks a clear explanation.
3. Can the prevalence of infection truly assess the risk level of each high-risk HPV type? Is
there necessarily a connection? Does a low infection rate mean a lower risk? Or does the study
only reflect the data presented in this article? In that case, are the results presented in this paper
meaningful?
Title: Predicting the Risk of High-grade Precancerous Cervical Lesions Based on High-risk
HPV Typing in Changsha China
Version: 1 Date: 21 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
After the author responded to and revised the reviewers' comments one by one, the quality of the
paper has been greatly improved. The paper is more scientific and feasible. It basically meets
the standards for journal publication. It is recommended to be accepted.
Title: Single-port non-lipolytic endoscopic surgery via the axillary approach for the treatment
of benign breast tumors has better clinical outcomes: a case control study
Version: 1 Date: 21 Nov 2024
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 protocols) 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?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used 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: The study is good, well organized, done well and covered an
important cosmetic topic in breast surgery
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
1 in the methods: The authors should provide intraoperative endoscopic photos for the steps of
the procedure
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
1- In methods: The authors should provide intraoperative endoscopic photos for the steps of
the procedure, 2- The authors should explain if the tumor was bigger than 3 cm; how they well
deliver from the wound? 3- The authors did not mention how many cases of the endoscopic
group have multiple tumors? 4- The authors write no postoperative subcutaneous emphysema
which is a frequent complication after endoscopic breast surgery; pleas explain 5- I thin the
references and citations are limited.