Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium Infection in Women with Bacterial Vaginosis.  
 
Version: 0 Date: 30 Jan 2020  
 
Reviewer: Per-Göran Larsson  
 
Reviewer's report:  
I think that the article is very good and well written and I have very lit tle comments. and I think 
it can be published.  
 
 However I have one question. The article is based on another study which is reference # 17. 
That study is referred to as study NS -002. There are somewhat little difference in how BV is 
diagnosed.  
 
In the p resent study BV is diagnosed with an 'Amsel positive' sample having at least 3 positive 
results; a pH value of greater than 4.5, a positive "whiff test" ("fishy' odor upon addition of 
KOH), presence of clue cells upon microscopic evaluation, and thin, homo geneous vaginal 
discharge.  
 
In the study reference 17 the BV is diagnosed  
"Vaginal discharge was analyzed on each subject at enrollment according  
to Amsel criteria, with a BV -positive sample being one that had 2 of the following 3 criteria: a 
pH value of  greater than 4.5, a positive "whiff test" ("fishy" odor upon addition of KOH), and the 
presence of clue cells upon microscopic examination.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specif y 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 the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, pleas e speci fy 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 publi cation 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 curr ently 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.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
 
 
 
I agree to the open peer review 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 for publication, my named repo rt 
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 in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal