Reviewer’s report
Title:  Self-reported  depression  and  social  support  are  associated  with  egocentric  network
characteristics of HIV-infected women of color
Version: 2 Date: 12 Sep 2019
Reviewer: Research Square Statistical Reviewer
Reviewer's report:
STATISTICAL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT: 
Is the study design appropriate for the research question (considering whether the analyzed population
accurately reflects the design and whether you see any problems with control/comparison groups, e.g.,
likely confounders)?
Yes - overall design, population, and control groups are appropriate
Are methodologies adequate and well implemented (considering whether assumptions are addressed
and whether analyses are robust)?
No - there are minor issues
Are the analyses adequately communicated (considering whether reporting details are adequate and
whether figures and tables are well labeled and described)?
No - there are minor issues
Does the interpretation accurately reflect the analyses without overstatement (considering whether
limitations/bias are acknowledged and whether accurate descriptors, e.g., 'significant', are used?
Yes - interpretation accurately reflects analyses, limitations/bias are acknowledged, accurate descriptors
are used
Could an appropriately REVISED version of this work represent a statistically sound contribution? 
Probably - with minor revisions
STATISTICAL REVIEWER COMMENTS:
The authors provide clear aims for the study and the analyses largely follow these aims. The choice of
analyses  also appears  to be appropriate,  yet  some  further  information  could  be  provided  for the
statistical analyses  and there are some issues  that need to be addressed to improve the analyses
conducted.
REQUESTED REVISIONS: 
On p.10, the authors suggest that sociodemographic variables will be treated as a dependent variable.
This would not make sense but there are no analyses presented using the sociodemographic variables as
dependent variables. Therefore, I assume this is just a typing error that needs to be removed.
On p.10 we are told that the regression models were adjusted for 'years of education'. It appears that
linear regression is being conducted and 'years of education' has 3 categories. This is not an appropriate
covariate for linear regression and would need to be dichotomised, or dummy variables could be used.
It is not clear if the unadjusted estimates in the regression model have been adjusted for the other
covariates in the model, i.e. are these the bivariate associations or partial coefficients?
It would be useful to include standardised coefficients in the regression models (it appears that the
coefficients currently presented are unstandardized). This would help with interpretation in terms of
allowing some comparison between the coefficients.
Given that the authors have chosen to construct a regression model, it would be useful to provide
overall model statistics, such as the R-squared value and an ANOVA testing this value. The authors
should also indicate that the assumptions of the linear regression analyses have been met.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required 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.
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 the 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.
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, 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 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 relating 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 interests?
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  these  reviews.  This  reviewer  has  agreed  to
publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons 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 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 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