JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Support for lowering cervical cancer screening age to 25 for women living with HIV:
Retrospective cross-sectional programmatic data from Botswana
Version: 1 Date: 04 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors provided the evidence for lowering the screening age to 25 for WLWH.
This could be the timely evidence for the WHO latest recommendation. The data were well
analyzed and presented. I still have several comments as follows:
1) In current study, study population has very high HIV positivity (90%), much higher than the
average HIV prevalence in Botswana, which was mentioned at 25.1% in Background. Why?
Population source source should be clarified.
2) In the Discussion Page10, Line231, author mentioned that “younger women were twice
more likely to have CIN2+”, a little bit confusing. I suggest to edit the sentence or just add
“among HIV-negative women” to clarify the fact. And then, the point arise my concern to
the study population and determination of disease outcome again: why CIN2+ burden is much
higher among HIV-negative younger women? it is not consistent with the current evidence. Any
explanation?
3) I don`t think it is appropriate to calculate overall CIN2+ prevalence as 10.9% (112/1029) and
9.9% (463/4685) in two age groups based on current data, reasons are:
i) over 30% women were eligible for cryotherapy without biopsy, which means some CIN2+
lesions without biopsy might be treated, resulting underestimation of CIN2+. Please add the
eligible criteria for the cryotherapy. If all eligible lesions regarded as
Title: Clinical and Pelvic Floor Ultrasound Characteristics of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Recurrence
after Transvaginal Mesh Pelvic Reconstruction
Version: 1 Date: 18 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
pelvic floor ultrasound is used ad analysed as predictor of surgical failure, but it is performed
after the operation. This is a major bias of the study
Title: Clinical and Pelvic Floor Ultrasound Characteristics of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Recurrence
after Transvaginal Mesh Pelvic Reconstruction
Version: 2 Date: 05 Feb 2022
Reviewer:  Hans Peter Dietz
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript is now much improved, but it will require another minor revision. There
remain a few language issues such as in line 73 which should read ‘different forms of pelvic
organ prolapse’, line 101 ‘and were followed up with PFUS', line 146: ‘integrity’ instead of
‘completeness’, etc, but such can be handled at the copy-editing stage.
Here a few further more substantive issues:
1.) On line 234 you claim that levator avulsion  (incidence 27.8% vs. 4.2%) did not reach
significance.  You must not make such a statement because it’s a contradiction of Results where
you write: “Only levator avulsion (27.8% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.001) and HA (26.35 cm2 vs. 21.70
cm2, P < 0.001) was significantly different between the two groups.”
You need to distinguish between uni- and multivariate analysis. There is a strong association
between avulsion and hiatal area, as you rightly point out. Odd things happen when you include
factors in multivariate analysis that are intercorrelated. Did you include an interaction term in
your multivariate analysis?
I would formulate as follows: “While avulsion and hiatal area were both highly significant
predictors of recurrence, only hiatal area remained significant on multivariate analysis. This may
be due to power issues or due to the strong association of the two factors.”
2.) I’d change line 248: ‘And, levator avulsion and levator hiatus area couldn’t be treated or
changed by TVM surgery. ‘ to ‘it appears unlikely that either avulsion or hiatal ballooning would
be greatly changed by surgery.’
By the way- there is a paper proving the point for avulsion: Abdul Jalil S, Guzman Rojas R, Dietz
HP. Does it matter whether avulsion is diagnosed pre- or postoperatively? Ultrasound Obstet
Gynecol 2016; 48 (4): 516-519. DOI: 10.1002/uog.15837
Incidentally, this paper also provides a strong defense against the second referee’s critique.
3.) Please point out that, for clinicians who do not have access to imaging, a surrogate for hiatal
area on Valsalva is Gh + Pb on the POPQ- if also measured on Valsalva: Khunda A, Shek KL,
Dietz HP. Can ballooning of the levator hiatus be determined clinically? Am J Obstet Gynecol
2012; 206 (3):.e241-244. and  Ow L, Subramaniam N, Kamisan Atan I, Friedman T, Martin AJ,
Dietz HP. GH/PB should be measured on maximal Valsalva rather than at rest. Female Pelvic
Med Reconstr Surg. 2018 Jul 3. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000608
By the way- Gh has independently been shown to be a predictor of recurrence, eg in: Vakili
B, Zheng Y, Loesch H, Echols K, Franco N, Chesson RR. Levator contraction strength
and genital hiatus as risk factors for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
2005;192:1592-8.
Finally, let me state that you have produced very good imaging to demonstrate sonographic
appearances of a transvaginal mesh. Well done!
Best wishes,
HP Dietz
Sydney
Title: Women survivors of intimate partner violence talk about using e-Health during pregnancy:
A focus group study.
Version: 1 Date: 29 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
This is a well-written and organized article on a timely topic as it relates to intimate partner
violence against women (IPVAW) and pregnancy. E-Health methods hold great potential for
women experiencing abuse for a number of reasons, many of which the authors note in the
manuscript. This is a topic worthy of exploration and I am glad to see work being done on it.
I do recommend some revising in order to make the manuscript more suitable for publication.
Namely, the authors highlight how the study's results are informative for midwives working
with pregnant survivors of IPVAW; the role of midwives is noted in the abstract. I was thus
expecting to see more discussion specifically of how midwives figure into using e-Health tools
with the women they work with, especially in reference to IPVAW. However, the discussion
section provides little advice/recommendations specific to midwives, with the exception of a few
sentences here and there. More targeted and specific information for how midwives can assist
pregnancy women experiencing IPVAW - and how they can do this using eHealth methods -
would significantly strengthen the manuscript.
Otherwise, it is a strong article. The sample size is small, but this is addressed in the limitations
section. Thank you for this contribution to the field.
Title: Women survivors of intimate partner violence talk about using e-Health during pregnancy:
A focus group study.
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
I consider it to be very interesting work, only certain aspects of the contextualization of the
research problem and the method need to be refined.
Background
1. 53-54: I would add a definition or at least a bibliographic citation to the concept of Intimate
Partner Violence Against Women (IPVAW).
2. I would restructure the first 3 paragraphs. I would start by talking about IPVAW and its
contextualization at the global level and in the Spanish context (as already stated), but then I
would continue with the consequences of IPVAW in general. In another paragraph, I would
address IPVAW in pregnancy and its respective consequences.
3. 73-76: it sounds repetitive about pregnant women experiencing IPVAW. I would use a
connector in the second sentence, e.g.: Furthermore, during pregnancy avoid…
4. 85-92: bibliographical references are missing, which are very relevant for the justification of
the importance of approaching this research problem from this perspective:
5. 99-100: missing bibliographical reference, as it is a hypothesis or possible explanation that
justifies the subject of the article, it is very important that it is contrasted.
6. 100-103: Missing bibliographical references
7. 111-115: I would remove everything related to methodology and data collection techniques
from the background and limit to explaining it in the method section of the article
Method
1. In the design section I think it is important to distinguish between methodology, method
and data collection technique. In this case, a study with qualitative methodology is proposed,
the method is not described (e.g. phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnology). I would leave
everything related to the focus group exclusively in the section on data collection, not before.
2. In the section on "study setting and participants" it is not stated exactly what type of sampling
was used and the rationale behind it. It is not made clear what link the health professional
has with the study and how exactly this recruitment operates. Also, I believe that this section
should mention the inclusion criteria that were taken into account when recruiting participants
or whether profiles were created to form the groups.
3. In the "Data collection" section, the data collection technique to be used (in this case the focus
group) should be explicitly stated, as well as citing an author or bibliographical reference that
has guided the application of this technique. Mainly because there is great variability of authors
and ways of carrying it out.
4. It is not clear whether the questions used in the script were intended to organize the analysis
in this way.
Results
1. 193-199: there is talk of an initiative implemented in COVID related to the use of a special
mask in pharmacies. I understand that this is not mentioned by the informants. So I would move
it to the discussion and remove it from the results.
Title: Women survivors of intimate partner violence talk about using e-Health during pregnancy:
A focus group study.
Version: 2 Date: 21 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
Very good job, just a few comments for your review.
Background
92-94:
The word "interventions" is repeated many times, I would reformulate the paragraph.  I don't
quite understand the next sentence: "eHealth interventions have the potential to provide more
flexibility and safer spaces than face-to-face interventions and can be aimed at screening
violence and providing interventions" Does this mean that eHealth interventions can also provide
other interventions? I think this needs to be reworded or removed.
I think it would be appropriate to always use the same nomenclature for IPVAW. In some cases,
only IPV is used. And since the definition has been made by showing the first acronym, it would
be appropriate to continue in that line.
110-113
Re-reading the objective I think it can be reformulated, just to make it more comprehensible,
as follows:
"Identify needs, concerns and preferences of survivors victims of IPVAW about eHealth
strategies to counsel and empower pregnant victims of IPV in antenatal care"
Method
116:
Qualitative analysis? Perhaps "qualitative approach" is better (less confusing).
120-127:
I would redesign the paragraph in the following way to facilitate its comprehension (as a
suggestion)
"Participants were recruited through a purposive sampling considering as inclusion criteria: 1.
Adult woman; 2. A previous victim of any type of IPVAW; 3. Previous pregnancy; 4. Fluent
Spanish speaker. The women were recruited through a municipal social service in the south of
Spain, two professional psychologists offered women who met inclusion criteria to participate in
qualitative interviews after briefly explaining the study. Women who agreed to participate were
contacted by a researcher to provide further details about the study and to obtain their informed
consent. Subsequently, the qualitative interview was led by a researcher and an observer and
conducted in September 2020"
It is important to clarify whether the municipal social service is related to IPVAW, I imagine it
is. It is not clear to me whether the inclusion criteria specifically stipulated that they are women
who have suffered violence during pregnancy. Because it could be a woman who was pregnant,
but suffered IPVAW before that or even after.
137-138
The same as before, it talks about women who have suffered IPVAW and have been pregnant.
This suggests to me that it was not necessary for them to have suffered IPVAW during
pregnancy. With the topics included in the interview script, it is intuited that they are women
who have suffered IPVAW during pregnancy, but in the previous sections it has to be clarified
and described better
Results
232
I don't understand why concerns are included under 3.1. Needs of pregnant women in an IPV
situation.
Title: Use of reusable menstrual management materials and associated factors among women
of reproductive age in Ghana: analysis of the 2017/18 Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey
Version: 1 Date: 17 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
I want to thank the authors for the interesting topic they have chosen to investigate. It appears
that after all the numerous works are done from the MICS  data in Ghana, attention is gradually
turning to reusable menstrual management materials which had hitherto received less attention.
Overall, I was impressed with the manuscript but have some minor comments for the authors
to address.
Abstract: The abstract was well written. In the methods section, the authors should indicate
that they used complex sample logistic regression. This will help every reader to know that the
complex survey design was accounted for, even before reading the main paper where the authors
have rightly noted this.
Introduction: The introduction was well written.
Methods: This section was well written and the authors used the appropriate analytical approach
to account for the complex survey design used in the MICS data collection by using the "svy
" command in Stata.
Results:
In Table 3: The authors should provide the complex sample model details for the multivariate
analysis under the table. These are found in the output from the "svy" model results in Stata.
They may use this format
 Population size:
 Number of observations:
 Number of strata:
 Number of primary sampling units :
 Design df :
 F (.., ...) :
 Prob.        :
 McKelvey and Zavoina's  R-sqaure :
(the McKelvey and Zavoina's  R2  may be directly obtained or obtained from post hoc
evaluations)
Discussion:
In the first paragraph, the authors reported a 13% prevalence of reusable menstrual management
materials. They should provide why, in their opinion, this is better or poor %. Is there any
benchmark the country should have met?  Are there some ongoing interventions in Ghana that
explain it? What makes this a success or work in progress within the context of Ghana?  I believe
that feedback on these questions would enrich the discussion.
Thank you for the good work done.
Title: Domestic Violence against Married Women during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt.
Version: 2 Date: 13 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Most Zannatul Ferdous
Reviewer's report:
I read with interest the article “Domestic Violence against Married Women during the
COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt”
The paper should rewrite.
The results of this study could be of interest of many scholars, but in my view, the manuscript
is not ready to be published in its current form.
Below you will find my comments that I hope will be useful for the authors when preparing a
strengthened version of the manuscript.
Method and materials: In method section there is no clear description about sample size and
how it is determined.
Discussion: In the discussion section, in-depth and critical discussion is required.
Line 216-218: rewrite these lines in the discussion section.
Title: Domestic Violence against Married Women during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt.
Version: 2 Date: 23 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this very interesting and well-designed research. Here
are some thoughts regarding your paper.
1. Your research highlights a correlation between tobacco use of the perpetrator and domestic
violence. Can you explain thoroughly this correlation (for more information: Stuart et al (2010)
Cigarette Smoking and Substance Use among Men Court-Referred to Domestic Violence
Treatment Programs)?
2. The increase of domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with
economic instability (for more information: Kourti et al (2021) Domestic Violence During the
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review). Please provide adequate information regarding
this in the discussion section.
3. In the result section can you provide data of co-occurrence between physical, verbal,
psychological and sexual violence?
4. In lines 237-238 you mention “Interestingly, a much more exposure rate of spousal violence
was reported in previous Egyptian studies (77%) (18) and 58.1% (Ali et a.,2017)”. Can you
explain this difference (e.g. due to limited access in social services during the lockdown).
5. In line 238 delete “(Ali et a.,2017)”.
6. In line 257 delete “services (Moreira at al.,2020)”.
7. In lines 266-269 you mention “The present study detected a declined rate of husbands who
used to have extramarital relationships (before crisis 20.7%, after-crisis 16.5%). As well as
the decreased number of respondents suffered from neutral husbands' reactions when she was
insulted by his relatives ( before-crisis 39.9%, after -crisis 31.9%)”. Can you explain this decline
(e.g. due to confinement measures).
8. In lines 293-294 you mention “Inconsistence to a previous study, which showed that the
husband's age at marriage, had no association with the risk of spousal violence”. Can you explain
this inconsistency?
9. Please use brackets and non-exponent format in in-text citations.
10.Please include DOI in the form of full URL, where applicable (for more
information: https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/submission-guidelines/preparing-your-
manuscript/research-articles) .
11. Overall the authors provide valuable data regarding the domestic violence during the
COVID-19 pandemic and fill a gab in the literature regarding domestic violence in Egypt.
Title: A DSM-5-based tool to monitor concurrent mood and premenstrual symptoms: The
McMaster Premenstrual and Mood Symptom Scale (MAC-PMSS)
Version: 2 Date: 20 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
This study is the validation of a current (DSMV) scale to assess both mood and PMDD - such
a scale is  innovative, useful and timely.
I like the menstrual cycle demographic background. Please now include more on mood disorder
background. for example:
in particular:
what was the break down of participants by bipolar type? (I, II, unspecified) it will help  clarify
who it was validated on/applicable to.
but also ( esp. as a psychiatrist) there would be interest in:
for MDD dx - was this a current depressive episode, or just hx of? (what mood state when did
SCID?)
and for bipolar - what mood state were they at SCID?/at entry?
While we know there is mood variation even on meds,  do you know if they were in treatment
for their mood dx?  on medication during evaluation?
when in MC were they evaluated? ex. all subjects at late luteal, or were MADRS/HAMD/YMRS
given at various MC phases?
what are the thoughts of trying /validating on a euthymic/non mood disorder population?
Thank you.
Title: A DSM-5-based tool to monitor concurrent mood and premenstrual symptoms: The
McMaster Premenstrual and Mood Symptom Scale (MAC-PMSS)
Version: 4 Date: 17 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
This study presents the validation and usefulness of a current (DSMV) scale to assess both mood
and PMDD - : the McMaster Premenstrual and Mood
Symptom Scale (MAC-PMSS) .  There is no other such scale and thus this is innovative and
valuable.  Responses are  well substantiated and articulately integrated into manuscript.
No further significant concerns/comments.
Abstract:
minor:  the first abstract sentence looks incomplete/is unclear.
background:
minor: do you mean lately? late doesnt fit
...significant premenstrual symptoms that was late classified by the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists as “premenstrual syndrome”
discussion:
minor grammar/typos
Therefore, because since the start of this project we envisioned the development of a user-
friendly toll that could be widely implemented in the clinical practice, ...
. The firmly believe that the involvement of people ...
...further improve access and acceptability of this new clinical toll.
...including failure to recall to complete the chart on any given day...
Title: A DSM-5-based tool to monitor concurrent mood and premenstrual symptoms: The
McMaster Premenstrual and Mood Symptom Scale (MAC-PMSS)
Version: 4 Date: 20 Mar 2022
Reviewer:  Jennifer L. Gordon
Reviewer's report:
The authors have done an excellent job responding to my feedback, either by editing the
manuscript or providing a strong rationale as to why they chose to forgo my recommendation.
Title: Young women’s food consumption and mental health: The role of employment
Version: 3 Date: 15 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
The major problem with many of the studies cited and with the discussion in this manuscript
is that the analysis is necessarily cross-sectional and correlational and can't be interpreted as
causal. So one cannot know whether it is depression causing fast food eating, or fast food eating
causing depression.  This needs to be clearly stated up front and in study limitations.  You could
suggest a causal future study.  Also, in the discussion more emphasis should be placed on the
low wages and likely poverty of the individuals surveyed and the impact of that on food choices
(i.e., fresh fruit is expensive) and also may be largely unavailable in so called poverty stricken
"food deserts".
I think the Figure 1. Employment as a Moderator is unnecessary , it is simple concept that doesn't
need representation and can be deleted.
That said examining the role that employment plays as a moderator of depression and fruit eating
is appreciated.  The manuscript is well written, clear, and amply annotated.
Title: Young women’s food consumption and mental health: The role of employment
Version: 3 Date: 19 Jan 2022
Reviewer:  Ali Al-hamzawi
Reviewer's report:
Abstract:
1. Methods: 2nd line no need for a total of just mention the number.
2. Healthy food consumption and depression: As long as the statements are related to the same
topic, it is preferable to delete the references 15,17 in the second line.
3.  Data and Sample:   it is better to be written as: The final sample included 1,524 young women,
4. Measures: third line:  it is this criterion  not this criteria
Title: Young women’s food consumption and mental health: The role of employment
Version: 4 Date: 08 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
I have indicated to accept  this manuscript, however, there are two more corrections that I feel
should be made before publication.  This should not need a review again but rather a check by
editor.
1) The authors have indicated that they removed figure one per my recommendations, however
it appears that the Figure one, showing the moderating effect of employment is still in there.
2)  I requested a revision in the study limitations, the authors replied with this this revision in
the manuscript ;
"Fourth, as we mentioned first, this study used a cross-sectional approach. Thus, it is not possible
to identify a cause and effect relationship between food consumption and depression among
young women. Thus, we recommend that future research employs longitudinal data to make up
for this study’s limitation."  However, it is not longitudinal data that is needed, to better establish
a casual effect, what is needed is a control group and a design in which depression is a dependent
variable and the independent variable is fruit or healthy food intake.  With those  corrections
made the manuscript should be accepted.