Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: How is patient -centred care conceptualized in women ’s health: A scoping review  
 
Version: 0 Date: 31 May 2019  
 
Reviewer: Walter Sermeus  
 
Reviewer's report:  
Well written manuscript. Well introduced. The aim of the study is well formulated. The search 
strategy is well described. Results are well described.  
Table 2: the table is  clear, but little bit unsatisfactory if the McCormack framework is used for 
structuring PCC within women's health. I would not only put a "X" to mention that this domain 
is covered in the publication, but more going into detail on how this dimension is de scribed or 
characterised for women's health. This would foster further research.  
It means that the results section might be more elaborated in describing these 6 domains, 
originally described by McCormack.  
I also wonder if there are no characteristics or concepts beyond the 6 dimensions mentioned by 
McCormack that is specific for women's health. It doesn't seem the case now.  
In the discussion section, some specific issues are mentioned such as "the aging and ethnic 
diversity of the female population, rise  in labour force participation, shift to marriage and 
childbearing later in life, increase in single parent households largely headed by women, 
women's simultaneous roles as paid workers and caregivers, and gaps in earnings for women 
compared with men, the  socio -economic  implications of poor health care for women are 
profound". How do these issues refer to the results? It should be more elaborated.  
Overall, good and interesting study  
Are the methods appropriate and well descr ibed?  
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.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
  
Decl aration 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.  
 
I declare tha t I have 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 ac cepted 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://creativecommo ns.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