JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Informed consent and coercion in recruitment advertisements for oocyte donors
Version: 2 Date: 05 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
This paper is well-written and will be an important addition to the body of literature regarding
oocyte donation.
Line 108/109: “Though [the] incidence of complications is generally low, they include ovarian
hyperstimulation (OHSS)…”
The following three studies indicate worrisome (not "low") reported instances of OHSS by
women who sell their eggs.
1. In this published study of 155 egg donors, 30.3% reported Ovarian Hyper Stimulation
Syndrome (OHSS).
US oocyte donors: a retrospective study of medical and psychosocial issues
W Kramer 1, J Schneider, N Schultz
Human Reproduction. 2009 Dec 24(12):3144-9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep309.
2. A 2014 second study of 176 egg donors published in Social Science & Medicine found that
32.4%  of the egg donors reported complications such as OHSS and infection.
Gendering gametes: The unequal contributions of sperm and egg donors Margaret Nelson,
Rosanna Hertz, and Wendy Kramer
3. A third study of 363 egg donors in 2021, reported 22.4% experiencing OHSS. A Mixed-
methods evaluation of egg donors’ physical, psychosocial, and disclosure experiences post-
donation, was presented by our partners from the University of Illinois at Chicago Dept. of
Population Health Nursing Science/ Dept. of Obstetrics & Gynecology at the American Society
of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) 2022 Scientific Congress & Expo.  This abstract was
presented with the ASRM's Nurses' Professional Group's best abstract award and the ASRM's
Mental Health Professional Group's best abstract award at the ASRM annual conference in 2022.
  This study yielded 345 completed surveys and was also presented at the MNRS (Midwest
Nursing Research Society) conference in March 2022 and the American College of Nurse-
Midwives annual meeting in May 2022.
July 2024 paper submitted to Fertility and Sterility.
Title: Informed consent and coercion in recruitment advertisements for oocyte donors
Version: 2 Date: 12 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Sam Everingham
Reviewer's report:
General Comments
This is a well-written paper, with a useful background  citing relevant literature.
Objectives
However given this paper pertains to activities during the Covid pandemic, yet  is being
submitted well after the pandemic, the tense of sentences on p 7, line 144 needs changing. A
key limitation of the study design is the fact that only the initial page of advertisements were
analysed and yet the objective claims to compare 'the discussion of risks'. Realistically, the
authors should replace the word 'discussion' with "mention' in the advertising context. This
methodology, limiting as it does investigation to the initial page of an advertisement makes it
impossible to know if there was fine print discussing risks
Methodology
Again on p9, the methodology refers to 'discussion of counselling' 'discussion of bonus
incentives' etc. Again it is unrealistic to consider the first page of an advertisement a sufficient
vehicle to allow space for a 'discussion'. Suggest amending the language.
Results
The tables are as presented, very difficult to interpret. The authors should consider presenting
these as grouped bar charts instead, showing percentages rather than n values Total n values for
each column can be shown in the graph row labels. The column of p values likewise is not easy
to interpret as currently laid out.
On p12, line 247, the authors use the phrase 'risk information content' which needs to be defined
earlier, as it is unclear what this refers to.
The description of the Table 3 results (p14, lines 266-271) are difficult to follow and need re-
writing. Table 3 suffers from very low cell sizes for all but the first two rows. Given this, the
data lacks any significance and the last 5 rows should instead be grouped as 'Other'. Again the
table is difficult to interpret and could better be presented as a bar chart
Discussion
The discussion is in general a useful one. The findings in regard to advertising for donors do
not appear to be particularly novel, apart from the fact that they were collected during covid. On
p17, lines 297- 306 & lines 315-317 belong in the Background. Lines 308-310 are not relevant
to this paper. Instead the authors should consider discussing the potential impact on the child of
learning what the 'market value' of their genetics were, via contact with their donor..
Conclusions
The sentences on p19 lines 352-356 are better moved to precede the points raised on Lines
311-314 lines , as these discuss the same concepts around donors no longer being anonymous
and the chance therefore of future contact with the children they are related to
Title: Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumour of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene
Rearrangement: A Case Report
Version: 0 Date: 05 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
Title and Abstract: The title is concise and informative, and the abstract provides a clear
overview of the case report. However, it would be beneficial to include a statement regarding
the significance of the case, especially concerning the rarity of the condition and the potential
implications for clinical practice.
Introduction: The introduction could benefit from a more extensive literature review on uterine
PEComa, including its classification, etiology, and relevant studies. This would help set the
stage for the case report and provide context for readers less familiar with the condition.
Discussion: The discussion section provides valuable insights into the diagnosis, classification,
and treatment of uterine PEComa. However, it would be beneficial to discuss the limitations of
the current treatment options, address the lack of standardized guidelines, and propose potential
avenues for future research. Please change  'some authors believe' it's not suitable for academical
language.
Figures:  Figures should be clearly labeled and referenced in the text without abbrevation
Citation and References: The article lacks current years  articles so reference list have to be
updated
Language and Grammar: The language and grammar used in the article need improvement.
Proofreading and editing for language and grammar are recommended.
Conclusion: The conclusion provides a summary of the case, but it could be enhanced by
reiterating the significance of the case in advancing our understanding of uterine PEComa and
reinforcing the importance of long-term follow-up in managing such cases.
In summary, the article is a valuable contribution to the field of gynecology and rare tumors.
With some improvements in organization, language, it can be a more compelling and informative
case report.
Decision: Major revision
Title: Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumour of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene
Rearrangement: A Case Report
Version: 0 Date: 15 Jan 2024
Reviewer's report:
- 'Ki-67 index was 8% (Figure 2A-D).' would you like to mean figure for the previous sentence
'However, they showed diffuse strong positivity for HMB-45, and Melan-A, and focally positive
(1+) staining for smooth muscle actin, TFE-3, CD34, and myogenin'?
- please, properly add the legends for figure A and B as you perfectly did for figure 2 panels.
- how did you exactly perform the follow-up with ultrasound, lab work-up? please kindly provide
specifics? moreover, how was your follow-up interval?
- the first paragraph of the discussion shall highly the findings of the present study.
- how different and similar your case to the published cases? (ex: pmid:37575749)
- 'According to the literature, total hysterectomy is the preferred treatment for patients without
a fertility requirement. ' Please cite the mentioned literature.
- Please, add the IRB number.
- English language editing is strongly advised.
Title: Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumour of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene
Rearrangement: A Case Report
Version: 3 Date: 09 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled " Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumor
of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene Rearrangement: A Case Report “ topic interesting enough to
attract readers' attention.
Although the manuscript can be considered already of good quality, I would suggest following
recommendations:
- I suggest a round of language revision, in order to correct few typos and improve readability.
- In recent years the molecular and genomic profiling of uterine cancer has evolved significantly.
Considering result and topics of this study, I suggest that authors to add references about recent
evidence in this topic e the possible prognostic role of novel factor and molecular target. I would
be glad if the authors discuss this important point, referring to: 37454351 and 35008194.
Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and completed. Considering all these
points, I think it could be of interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority
to be published after minor revisions.
Title: Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumour of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene
Rearrangement: A Case Report
Version: 3 Date: 17 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Fouad Nahhat
Reviewer's report:
The paper discusses a rare and interesting topic. The adjustments made by the authors improved
the paper quality; however, I have a few more suggestions.
1- Abstract:
It should be expanded to ensure comprehensiveness  (up to 350 words).
a) In the background part, it would be beneficial to start with one or two sentences on PEComa
in general.
b) In the case presentation part, it would be better to add the presenting symptom and some of
the test performed initially.
c) The conclusion part should be entirely replaced with the take-home message you wish the
reader take after reading your work. It would be more suitable to write that PEComa of the
gynecologic tract is a rare and challenging entity that should be on the list of DDx when dealing
with certain symptoms and that further research is needed to establish treatment protocols.
2- Background:
a) More statistics from the literature should be mentioned. For example,  ratio/percentage of
PEComa in uterine neoplasms (if available) or number of previously published similar cases.
b) Also, if available, survival rates from previous cases should be added.
c) For comprehensiveness, it would be beneficial to write briefly about PEComa treatment in
the background section.
3- Conclusion:
a) Formal English language should be adopted. For example, "However" instead of "But" and
"It is" instead of "It's".
The manuscript, in general, still needs a major language revision.
Title: Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumour of the Uterus without TFE3 Gene
Rearrangement: A Case Report
Version: 4 Date: 05 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made. I think it could be of
interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority to be published.
Title: Determining the predictors of preventive behaviors adopted by pregnant women against
COVID-19 based on the health belief model constructs
Version: 0 Date: 15 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Marjan Mardani-Hamooleh
Reviewer's report:
All parts of the article need serious revision. I will mention some of them.
Write covid-19 in full at the beginning and then write it in abbreviated form.
In the introduction, describe the health belief model. Then write its application in the present
study.
Education is mentioned in the introduction. You have nothing to do with this concept in this
study.
There are additional explanations in the introduction. You must pay attention to the concepts
under study. These have caused you to not be able to show the necessity of doing the study.
Weaknesses of previous studies have not been identified. Review studies are few.
The time of the study is not known. Sampling should be written in full detail. How was the
access to the sample? How was the questionnaire completed? In general, the method part is very
incomplete.
Write completely how you dealt with the restrictions caused by covid-19 at the time of sampling?
The conclusion should be written completely based on the results.
Title: Determining the predictors of preventive behaviors adopted by pregnant women against
COVID-19 based on the health belief model constructs
Version: 0 Date: 15 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Hojjat Farahmandnia
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper and the content is very good but I suggest the paper can be improved
in the following ways:
-Please correct all parts of the article according to the guidelines of the journal authors guideline
Abstract
-please add type of study ,years of implement this study, data collection, data analysis  method
in both abstract and method in main text.
-In the conclusion part, it is necessary to specify the researcher's proposal to improve the
conditions and use of the beneficiaries
Introduction
Please bring the following items
1- Definition of the research problem
2- The magnitude and importance of the study variable
3- Expressing the necessity of conducting the study
Finally, the practical purpose of the study should be stated
Methods
Please add the following items
-please add the inclusion and exclusion
-please add the validity of tools in your participant especially reliability in your participants
context.
-please add the details of tool scoring
Discussion
In the discussion section, it is necessary to compare the main results of the study with the results
of other studies in this field.
Please refer to journal published articles and used some reference to citation we proposed this
article for enrichment.
-Post-traumatic stress disorder in medical workers involved in earthquake response: A
systematic review and meta-analysis
-Investigating the burden of disease dimensions (time-dependent, developmental, physical,
social and emotional) among family caregivers with COVID-19 patients in Iran
-Explore pre-hospital emergency challenges in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic: A quality
content analysis in the Iranian context
- Exploring the challenges of Iranian government hospitals related to Covid-19 pandemic
management: a qualitative content analysis research from the nurses perspective
-What are the strengths and limitations of the study?
Conclusion
# What are your suggestion for future studies?
Best regards
Title: Prevalence of Menstrual Alterations Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Systematic
Review & Meta-Analysis
Version: 2 Date: 22 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Mario Festin
Reviewer's report:
In the attached document, I have some questions for clarification addressed to the authors.
The clarfications may be useful to be incorporated into the document to make it clearer and to
address potential questions on the paper.
Title: Prevalence of Menstrual Alterations Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Systematic
Review & Meta-Analysis
Version: 3 Date: 29 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I carefully evaluated the revised version of this manuscript.
The authors have performed the required changes, improving significantly the quality of the
paper.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
I have no further concerns.
Title: Unmet Menstrual Needs and Psychosocial Well-being among Schoolgirls in Northern
Tanzania: Baseline Results from the PASS MHW Study
Version: 2 Date: 13 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Pritam Ghosh
Reviewer's report:
Title: Unmet Menstrual Needs and Psychosocial Well-being among Schoolgirls in Northern
Tanzania:  Baseline Results from the PASS MHW Study
Firstly, I would like to commend the authors on their well-structured and scientifically rigorous
study. The authors have outlined an interesting and relevant topic in this paper. However, I have
identified a few areas where the manuscript could be improved to enhance its clarity and impact.
Please find my specific comments below:
Abstract: I must suggest the authors include the number of SDGs for gender equality, good
health and wellbeing, and quality education in the abstract.
Make the result section more compact. The authors must emphasize the main finding.
Introduction: The authors must also include the number of SDGs for gender equality, good health
and wellbeing, and quality education in the introduction.
Research questions and research gaps are unclear. the authors must highlight the objectives of
the study.
Yet, to be of interest for readers outside Tanzania, too, the paper should also refer to some studies
in the international literature, to highlight the gaps and unanswered questions, the methodologies
used, etc. This could also help with the interpretation of the results, as it could allow international
comparisons. The authors must cite following references:
Ghosh, P., Bose, K. (2021). Determinants of Menstrual Hygiene Management among Young
Indian Women: An Investigation Based on the National Family Health Survey 2015-16. Journal
of Indian Anthropological Society, 56(3), 290-308.
Singh, A., Chakrabarty, M., Singh, S. et al. Menstrual hygiene practices among adolescent
women in rural India: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 22, 2126 (2022). https://
doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14622-7
Methodology and result sections are well organized.
Discussion:
Along with the limitations of the research, the authors must highlight some strengths of this
study.
I suggest the authors consider expanding their discussion on the broader implications and
relevance of their findings to attract a wider readership.
Authors must suggest some policies or strategies to improve menstrual health and psychosocial
well-being of school girls based on the specific findings of the current investigation. Or they
can also outline that how the existing policies regarding menstrual hygiene management in
Tanzania’s schools can be modified or upgraded.
Title: Unmet Menstrual Needs and Psychosocial Well-being among Schoolgirls in Northern
Tanzania: Baseline Results from the PASS MHW Study
Version: 2 Date: 10 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comment 1: Overall, please pay attention to grammar and the use of appropriate words.
Abstract
Comment 2: Typically, the abstract should be concise, with a word limit of 200 to 250 words.
The results section contains a lot of information; please extract only the most important results,
not all
Introduction
Comment 3: Please rewrite. At the beginning of the introduction, mention the global scenario,
followed by the situation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and then present the
specific data for the country in focus.
Comment 4: You can cite these papers for the introductory paragraph https://doi.org/10.1136/
bmjopen-2016-015508 and https://doi.org/10.2166/washdev.2023.153
Comment 5: All section headings should be formatted as Heading 1, while subheadings should
be formatted as Heading 2.
Method
Comment 6: There in no specific study design mentioned in the Study Design and Participants
section. Did not any mention sample size. What do you mean by a self-reporting questionnaire?
Did you conduct FDG as you mentioned group of students? Is it mixed method study?
Comment 7: The aim of the study should be mentioned at the end of the introduction, not in the
method section. on the other hand, aim should be in one sentence. Seems you mentioned all of
your specific objectives.
Comment 8: You can mention school environment instead of school climate.
Discussion
Comment 9: Usually the first paragraph of the discussion section should present the study's
findings. Subsequent paragraphs can include tables and further discussion. Aim of the study
sounds repetitive.
Comment 10: Strength of the study? Ethical approval section should be always at the end of
the method section.
Title: Unmet Menstrual Needs and Psychosocial Well-being among Schoolgirls in Northern
Tanzania: Baseline Results from the PASS MHW Study
Version: 4 Date: 23 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Pritam Ghosh
Reviewer's report:
The authors have carefully addressed all my suggestions in the revised version of the manuscript.
I have a minor suggestion for enhancing the clarity and precision of the abstract and introduction
sections. In the abstract and introduction section, the authors state:
“…essential to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals 3-5 (gender equality, good health
and wellbeing, and quality education).”
For improved clarity and to maintain consistency, it would be beneficial to explicitly reference
each Sustainable Development Goal by both its number and title. I recommend revising this to:
“…essential to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of good health and
wellbeing (SDG 03), quality education (SDG 04), and gender equality (SDG 05).”
This modification will make it easier for readers to comprehend the precise goals and their order,
as well as make it clear which SDGs are being addressed.
Title: Understanding the impact of endometriosis on women’s life: an integrative review of
systematic reviews
Version: 3 Date: 26 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for letting me review this article.
The article is interesting, but I don't think the title reflects its content . The title suggests that
the article addresses quality of life, but the included studies appear to focus more on symptom
burden and life circumstances among women with endometriosis. According to the table, for
instance, articles 2, 3, and 5 do not seem to address quality of life at all. Quality of life is a
debated concept, and if you are employing a broad interpretation of the term, it should be clearly
defined in the background or methods section of your study.
I also have some concerns with the discussion section. It partially repeats the results. I would
prefer a more in-depth discussion at a meta-level. Please consider shortening the discussion and
maintaining a higher level of analysis. How are your findings applicable? I would like to see a
discussion that addresses the overarching aspects of living with endometriosis.
For example,  there coudl be a deeper disussion on patient-centred care, that is now only
briefly mentioned.  A recent study showed that having a gynecologist with patient responsibility
was an independent predictor for high patient-centeredness, which could be discussed (https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06887-5). Another study showed that
higher degree of patient-centeredness was associated with a better QoL, showing the importance
of patient-centeredness also in the light of QoL (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02694-5).
It would be nice to also add some strenghts of the study.