Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Texas women ’s decisions and experiences with self -managed abortion  
 
Version: 0 Date: 12 Feb 2019  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:  
 
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that address es 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?  
 
No - there are majo r issues  
 
 
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?  
 
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study  
 
 
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not 
overstated?  
 
No - there are major issues  
 
 
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version o f this work technically 
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?  
 
Maybe - with major revisions  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
 
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is an important study with a very relevant and timely topic. The 
author has conc eptualized the problem well and develop coherent objectives. There is however a 
weakness in the design which the author has also acknowledged. The sampling technique is not 
able to pick a representative sample of the population. It is based on those who op t to be part of 
the study at the health facility level and there is no effort to understand those who opted out. 
Further, women who have not reached the hospital and who may be at the community level after 
attempting self managed abortion are not studied. Some of these women may have had 
successful abortions or totally failed abortions and kept the pregnancies. Because of this 
weakness in design, it is hard to generalized findings of the study or compare the results to 
previous studies.  
 
 
REQUESTED REVISION S:  
 
This being a rather sensitive study, it can be published with the understanding that the sampling 
design makes it rather weak. A recommendation should be made to the extent that a more 
thorough study is recommended to confirm these results.  
 
 
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
 
No 
 
Note: This reviewer report can be downloaded - see attached pdf file.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is requir ed 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.  
 
No 
 
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:  
 
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 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 re lating 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 intere sts? 
 
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, Research Square. Reviewers with 
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for t hese reviews. This reviewer has 
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commo ns 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 the reviewer 
recommendation.  
 
I agree to the open peer rev iew 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 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 included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal