Title: Application an internet facilitation in a community-based cervical cancer screening
project
Version: 2 Date: 27 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
We appreciate your work on a highly significant subject. Below are the suggestions regarding
your study:
1. I don’t agree with the type of study, as I believe it is a descriptive study. The title should e
revised accordingly.
2. The introduction should include global and regional data on HPV.
3. Please check the order of references in the introduction; reference number 10 is missing.
4. The method section should include how descriptive data are expressed, for example, in the
form of  n(%)."
5. “The website (www.mcareu.com) was developed by Cervical Cancer Project Team from
Peking University Shenzhen Hospital (PUSH) in 2013-2014 and upgraded to match the
requirements of the study. It was designed for public education on cervical cancer prevention,
self-sampling instruction in optional graphs and videos, screening registration, result reporting,
and further-step guidance for hrHPV-positive women.”
Is it only the high-risk HPV types mentioned in the method section and other sections of the
study?
Does the study consider HPV or high-risk HPV positive? There seems to be confusion. It should
be corrected in other parts as well.
6. I find the explanation in Figure 1 and Figure 2 unnecessary. The text should include this
description under (3. Registration for participation and screening delivery). For the figures, a
title alone would suffice.
7. There seems to be some confusion. The arrows in Figure 2 should be adjusted.
8. Data presentation should be defined in the Methods section and organized in the findings. It
needs to be clarified how the data will be expressed, whether in numbers, percentages, or mean
# SD.
9. Instead of the writing style "62.8% (6,286/10,010)," the following options can be preferred
once the data definition is added to the Methods section:
6,286 (62.8%)
62.8% (6,286)
10. “…….of government officers, with a mean age of 35.9 years (Table 1)……”
In sentences in which the mean is given, the standard deviation should be added.
11. “ ……The mean-ages of the personal screening and the group screening groups were
39.9(25-57) years and 34.4(25-58) years, respectively……….”
The data should be defined in the method section and the findings should be arranged
accordingly. If it is the mean, the standard deviation should be added.
12. “……..Data errors were founded in 0.64% (17/2,666) and 0.76% (56/7,344) of the women
in personal and group screening, respectively, with no significant difference (Table 2)……..”
What is meant by data errors? It must be defined. How was it determined that there was no
difference? If statistical analysis is done, it should be written, if not, the data should be defined
as n(%)
13. SD should be added to the mean in Table 2. Data should be arranged as n (%).
14. If there is information about the results of women who underwent colposcopy, it should be
added.
15. Are “any HPV positives” in Table 4 any HPV positive? Are they only hrHPV positive?
16. Table 4 is missing column headings.
In the table, n (%) should be preferred instead of 11.34% (1135/10011)
17. “……..Then they successfully organized self-sampling-based screening for 8,382 women in
a rural region in Guangdong Province, China……”
No reference was given to this section in the discussion. The reference of the study should be
attached.
18………… that 1) publicly recognized high-level medical care was preferred, 2) the cervical
cancer screening program should include management and precancer treatment as inseparable
parts, and 3) free of charge may be a working way to get a high management rate.
If these are the results of the study, the findings should be included in the section.
19…………………… This conclusion was further evidenced by Qu at els., who shared a
population screening project conducted in Xinxiang, Henan, China, using internet facilitated
community screening model. In the project, the internet facilitation enables 272,004 women to
register in 33 days, and 188,096 to be screened in 29 days (17). ……………..
This sentence should be in the discussion section, not the concluding paragraph.
The conclusion section should be rearranged.