Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Intimate partner sexual violence and risk for femicide, suicidality and substance use 
among women in antenatal care and general out -patients in Thailand  
 
Version: 1 Date: 28 Feb 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Tina Bloom  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
Title:  
 
The authors said they changed the title per reviewer feedback, but it does not appear actually 
changed.  
 
Abstract  
 
Appears fine  
 
Background  
 
Would be OK to use abbreviation of IPV represent Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) after the first 
usage.  
 
It would be easy to follow if the authors will reorganize the outline of background. For example, 
firstly, we can start IPV refers to …….. Secondly, in  studies in high income countries….. 
Thirdly, According to WHO in Thailand….. Fourthly, there is lack of studies….. Finally, the aim 
of study.  
 
Method  
 
Measures description would be consistency if the authors can interpret the level of score in each 
tool, s ome tools interpreted, some tools not.  
 
In Data analysis part, authors use 95% confidence interval, but they wrote in abstract and table is 
99%.  
 
The justification for using the outdated 15 -item DA is not particularly strong, but it will do.  
 
Discussion  
 
Is improved  
 
Table  
 
Table 1,2,3,4, it will make it easy and strong table if the authors can put P<0.005 and put * to 
indicate significant.  
 
Conclusion  
 
It is fine.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify 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 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 a n 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 reimb ursements, 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. My Thai doctoral student Tipparat Udmuangpia 
collaborated in this review and she also has no competing interests.  
 
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' 
respo nses. 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