Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Meanings of abortion in context: Accounts of abortion in the lives of women diagnosed 
with breast cancer  
 
Version: 0 Date: 23 Jan 2017  
 
Reviewer: Janette Perz  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This manuscript describes women's constructions of abortion in and around the context of 
cancer.  A case study methodology is used to describe spontaneous accounts of abortion amongst 
a sample of young women with breast cancer.  The paper is well written and p resented and offers 
a unique approach to discussion of an important topic.  With minor revision the paper would be 
of interest to the readers of BMC Women's Health.  
 
Minor Revisions  
1. The phrase "research linking abortion and breast cancer" or similar coul d be positioned as 
implying causation.  Could be reworded to avoid this reading which is not consistent with 
position articulated by the authors.  
 
2. Lines 121 -123 could reference research that demonstrates the impact of breast cancer and 
treatments upon wo men in terms of psychological wellbeing and distress.  
 
3. Lines 131 -133 reference required.  Delete "Western" here and elsewhere.  
 
4. Lines 133 -143 could be expanded to include a discussion of the perceived impact of BC and 
treatments on the child in additio n to perceived impacts on the woman.  This issue is briefly 
mentioned on the following page.  Could be consolidated into one section.  
 
5. Para 2 in "Breast Cancer" is about fertility/pregnancy and breast cancer.  Could be combined 
with the following section s.  This would allow for a reduction in the number of sub -headings 
in the Background.  
 
6. Line 169 - what is the ethical dilemma? Briefly note.  
 
7. Line 225 - subheading not required as the method described applies to the current paper.  
From Line 255 some s light editing required to remove some repetition regarding the analysis 
approach that is described in detail on the following page.  
 
8. Line 248 - remove 'about' when describing the length of interviews.  
 
9. Line 273 -275 can be deleted as unneeded. 275 -279 c ould also be considered for deletion.  
 
10. Line 291 - Table 1 re -ordered in line with the order of the cases presented rather than 
descending by age at interview.  
 
11. Line 358 - 'described repressing' rather than repressed.  
 
12. Line 368 - insert 'who were' in primary school.  
 
13. Lines 368 -384 - the extended detail of Kristina's cancer care experience seems tangential to 
the topic of the paper.  Suggest cutting or reducing.  
 
14. Discussion of the limitations of the research/implications and a more explicit dis cussion of 
the clinical and practice implications of the research would strengthen the paper.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please 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 t he manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of wr itten English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received re imbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain o r 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 f rom 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 n o 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.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the websi te along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access 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 name d report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal