JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Effect of maternal employment on exclusive breastfeeding practice among mothers of
infants 6-12 months old in Wolkite town, Ethiopia:   a comparative cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 14 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
Effect of maternal employment on exclusive breastfeeding practice among mothers of infants
6-12 months old in Wolkite town, Ethiopia: a comparative cross-sectional study
Reviewer feedback to authors
Generally, though the topic is interesting there should be grammatical and sentence structure
corrections in addition to that the given comments and suggestions are as follows:
Introduction
# Insert references for line 60 statement
# Cite updated references for line 67
Methods
# Line 121 which random selection was used? Systematic or simple make it specific?
# Hou much percentage of the participants and at which place the pretest questionnaire was
conducted?
# What is your evidence for the p-value#0.2 cut-off for bivariable analysis to screen the
independent variables?
Result
# Table 4, Table 5, and Table 6 should be corrected regarding the presentation of COR including
CI since lines 248-278
Conclusion and
# Give the recommendations based on your findings to concerned bodies including the scientific
communities?
Title: Effect of maternal employment on exclusive breastfeeding practice among mothers of
infants 6-12 months old in Wolkite town, Ethiopia:   a comparative cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 18 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors, thank you for your nice work, saying I have listed my questions and comments
below.
1. Abstract
In the abstract section, the authors should describe what exclusive breastfeeding means?
In the conclusion section, what type of intervention do you recommend, please be specific.
What are keywords,  purpose makes it comprehensive?
2. the introduction is very long try to reduce it by at least one paragraph is enough, and add
policy issues related to exclusive breastfeeding in Ethiopia.
Method and materials
In the study area try to incorporate the coverage of ANC, Skilled birth attendants, and PNC
because it affects the exclusive breastfeeding practice, so try to incorporate such information.
The result section including the discussion is well written.
Title: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals Working in a Training and Research
Hospital on Early Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer (A Somalia Example): Cross-Sectional Study
Version: 1 Date: 12 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
It is an important article about cervical cancer from Somalia.
I have some comments.
It would be best if you used the STROBE guideline for reporting. https://www.goodreports.org/
reporting-checklists/strobe-cross-sectional/
It is an important topic about cervical cancer screening and diagnosis.
You should indicate the study's design with a commonly used term in the title.
Inconsistent spacing in the whole article. Generally, you use two spaces. It's best to use consistent
spacing between sentences within a document.
In the abstract section, you should use exact p-values instead of p<0.05.
Your keyword is "healthcare workers", but you use healthcare professionals.
If you want to increase your article's search engine discoverability,  you should write your
abstract and title with the SEO method (Search Engine Optimization).
The phrase "all over the world" may be wordy. Consider changing the wording. "worldwide."
You should check your article for  "a, an, the, comma, dot".
"Studies show that it is not at the desired level [2,3,5,7-9,10]." You can add this reference for
cervical cancer. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24568517/
You should give more information about your questions' internal validity.
It would be best to write about statistical software "IBM SPSS Statistics Version 22".
In the method section, you can write that you have given the min-max values.
It would be best if you edited your "Tablo 1 " >>>Table 1.
You should use dots instead of commas in Table 1-2-3-4-5.
If you find the p-value =0.000, you should write p<0.001.
If you find differences among groups (>2), you can show differences with alphabetic symbols.
"43.9% (123 participants) who knew that bleeding between menstrual cycles is an early sign of
cervical cancer,39.6% (111 participants) knew that sexual experience at an early age (age 16 and
below) was a risk factor for cervical cancer, 61.8% (173 participants) knew that smoking and
50.7% knew that polygamous sexual life was a risk factor for cervical cancer ( 142 participants),
53.6% (150 participants) who think that having a family history of cancer will increase the risk
of cervical cancer, and 31.4% (88 participants) who believe that there is no protective vaccine
from HPV (human papillomavirus)."You should rewrite the sentence.
A knowledgeable audience might find this sentence hard to read.
You may consider:
Removing any unnecessary words
Splitting it into two sentences.
You can give more limitations about your article.
You should check your references for writing rules.
I want to review after revision.
Best wishes
Title: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals Working in a Training and Research
Hospital on Early Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer (A Somalia Example): Cross-Sectional Study
Version: 1 Date: 22 Feb 2022
Reviewer:  Komsun Suwannarurk
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for opportunity to review the paper from Africa where cervical cancer was the major
burden disease.
Introduction part was too much. The sentences should be removed for brief and concised.
Result part was too redundancy. The authors explained all data in table into text part of result.
Overall was interesting. This manuscript was too much grammar errors . The redundancy was
too much. Some paragraph of discussion part was similar to introduction part.
Title: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals Working in a Training and Research
Hospital on Early Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer (A Somalia Example): Cross-Sectional Study
Version: 3 Date: 03 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Komsun Suwannarurk
Reviewer's report:
The author did not correct the manuscript according to the reviewers. There were numerous
grammatic mistakes that were not corrected. For example, the author  used comma instead of
full stop in table. The other reviewer already comment it, but the author did not correct it.
Rejection was recommended.
Title: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals Working in a Training and Research
Hospital on Early Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer (A Somalia Example): Cross-Sectional Study
Version: 5 Date: 27 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
Thank you for your all corrections.
But you should edit your all tables.
In English, unlike Turkish, when writing decimal numbers, "dot" should be used as a separator
instead of "comma".
I do not have any other suggestions
Title: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals Working in a Training and Research
Hospital on Early Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer (A Somalia Example): Cross-Sectional Study
Version: 5 Date: 30 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Komsun Suwannarurk
Reviewer's report:
The authors did not correct as my comment in previous revised. This might be difficult to
understand. May it send back the  audited manuscript to editorial mail.
Title: Differential effect of prenatal exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine (1983-85) on the
risk of adulthood hypertension based on sex: a historical cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 27 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors conducted a study on the association of prenatal-exposure to the Great Ethiopian
Famine and hypertension in adulthood, and found that adult exposed females had higher risk of
hypertension as compared to males. This is an interesting manuscript. But there are still some
questions before the article is received, and I hope the author can reply#
1. The control group was born in 1997-1998. Is it appropriate?  Did social hunger disappear
completely during this period?  Does it affect the fetus if the mother has already experienced
starvation?
2. This manuscript focuses on the differential effects of gender prenatal exposure to the Ethiopian
famine on the risk of hypertension in adulthood, but is it representative that only 350 people
from a given region were included in the study?
Title: Differential effect of prenatal exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine (1983-85) on the
risk of adulthood hypertension based on sex: a historical cohort study
Version: 0 Date: 04 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors examined the association of prenatal-exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine and
hypertension in adulthood and investigate if there existed sex difference in the risk estimate
by sampling 1/3 of persons born at the epicenter of the famine in 1980s and a sample of non-
exposed born in a period one year after the famine.
Main concern
1. Age is an important confounder in this study. In the model 2 and 3, the authors adjusted for age
but how the authors did so since it is the systematic difference between the exposed and the non-
exposed group. Try to estimate the influence of famine by restricting the exposed group to those
born in the end of famine and the non-exposed group to those born in the early of the selected
period. In the supplementary 2, the authors mentioned the cohort born 08/September/1981-30/
August/1983. If they have hypertension information for this cohort, please also include them
as a reference group.
2. When the authors calculated the sample size, they set a design effect of 2, which is quite high.
Is it reasonable to use such a high value especially when the authors used the value for getting
the sample size?
What is the hypothesis that effect of famine are different according to sex? Are the findings for
the sex difference a chance finding?
Minor comments
1. Supplementary file 1_sampling procedure: persons in group1 (Prenatal exposed) and group
2(Non exposed group) is not the same as the total participants (n=968).
Please clearly indicate that the study was conducted in the period of (March 15 to April 30, 2019)
2. Please provide the page number, and line number.
3. Results section. The authors stated that ‘The prevalence of hypertension among study
participants in famine exposed and non-exposed group were 18.3% and 8.9%, respectively.’
Please provide number of persons with hypertension in the exposed and non-exposed group.
4. For table 2 and table 3, please present the number of persons in the exposed and non-exposed
group and the number of persons with hypertension in each group.
5. The author stated that it is the first one to examine the association between famine and risk of
hypertension in Ethiopia. Please refer more international studies on the topic and discuss their
findings.
Title: Differential effect of prenatal exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine (1983-85) on the
risk of adulthood hypertension based on sex: a historical cohort study
Version: 2 Date: 01 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
My main concern and the author’s response In the first round of comments are listed in the
following. I don’t think the authors provided answers for the concern without providing extra
analyses. The increased risk of hypertension found in the exposed group could be due to the
systematic difference on age between the exposed and unexposed group (the exposed group is
systemically older than the control). The author stated that ‘Our focus here is to study the impact
of famine in the first 1000 days where fetal programming is undergoing.’ Is it 100 days rather
than 1000 days?
The first round comment
Main concern from the reviewer
1. Age is an important confounder in this study. In the model 2 and 3, the authors adjusted for age
but how the authors did so since it is the systematic difference between the exposed and the non-
exposed group. Try to estimate the influence of famine by restricting the exposed group to those
born in the end of famine and the non-exposed group to those born in the early of the selected
period. In the supplementary 2, the authors mentioned the cohort born 08/September/1981-30/
August/1983. If they have hypertension information for this cohort, please also include them
as a reference group.
*Here, our esteemed reviewer mentioned an important point. Age is used to trace the exposure
as proxy given the famine was in the year stated. And yet, we were also curious if the age
difference within each group really matters. Each of the groups, exposed and non-exposed, had
ranges of age (34-36 Vs 30-32). We don’t want to ignore these differences at each group as blood
pressure is sensitive for each year age changes. The supplementary file stated post-natal period
starvation groups which was theoretical, not part of the present study, thus the supplement is
edited for clarity. Our focus here is to study the impact of famine in the first 1000 days where
fetal programming is undergoing.
Title: Differential effect of prenatal exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine (1983-85) on the
risk of adulthood hypertension based on sex: a historical cohort study
Version: 2 Date: 09 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
This is a historical cohort study that examined the different effects of prenatal exposure to
Ethiopian famine on the risk of hypertension in adulthood. The Doha theory states that in
addition to lifestyle and genetic inheritance in adulthood, environmental factors early in life,
including nutrition, also influence the risk of certain adult NCDS. The study, which could be
seen as an extension of the Doha hypothesis, is hard to find in the field now that widespread
hunger is rare. This article is meaningful and agreed to be published.
Title: Differential effect of prenatal exposure to the Great Ethiopian Famine (1983-85) on the
risk of adulthood hypertension based on sex: a historical cohort study
Version: 5 Date: 26 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
The message from the authors is clear to me and acceptable. At the beginning, I thought the
authors should have recruited persons born before famine as a reference group as well to balance
the effect of age on hypertension. But this type of reference group suffered famine in early
childhood that might have also influence on hypertension later in life. The unexposed group after
famine might be a better choice. It is still a good idea to mention the difference of hypertension
for 2-3 years interval between the exposed and the unexposed was unlikely to explain the
findings of the study.
Minor comments
Keep consistency on the number of decimals in the abstract and the text. Two decimals should
be fine.
Sentence in line 121 seems to be incomplete.
Title: "Even if I’m undetectable, I just feel like I would die": A qualitative study to understand
the psychological and socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on women living
with HIV (WLWH) in Chicago, IL
Version: 1 Date: 05 May 2022
Reviewer:  Eshrat Ara
Reviewer's report:
I would like the authors  to defend the study on the point that how the study findings are
contributing to the already existing knowledge on the concept.  Further what effective strategies
can be adopted to better support the women living with HIV.
Title: Efficacy evaluation of albumin-bound paclitaxel combined with carboplatin as
neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary epithelial ovarian cancer                
Version: 1 Date: 29 Jan 2022
Reviewer:  Gatot N. Adhipurnawan Winarno
Reviewer's report:
Major revisions:
1. Line 11-12 declare that ORR and tumor reduction rate was better for Nab-TC group compare
to TC group. This statement is inconsistent with lines 173-174 and 177-178, which showed
that ORR and tumor reduction had no significant difference (p>0,05). If this variable was not
significant, I suggest removing it from the abstract. Thus, can be replaced with variables which
more significant like ca125 reduction.
2. Line 13 mentioned the postoperative complication rate. The percentage of characteristics that
used to determine this rate can be added in the abstract as well.
3. Line 13 mentioned the postoperative complication rate. Briefly explain in method, what
characteristics that are used to determine this rate.
4. Briefly describe the demographic data or characteristics of the subject at the beginning result
section.
5. Line 135-144 showed the exclusion criteria and amount of subjects who were eligible for the
study. This part would arrange better in “patients and method” subheading.
6. Is there any data about the amount of albumin pre and postoperative/ therapy?
7. Explain the dose of albumin that used for therapy in this study
Minor revisions:
1. Line 183-184: written postoperative anemia and low protein with p < 0,05, but this data did
not find in the table presented. The table only showed transfusion data. Is that the same thing?
If that so, please use the consistent word.
2. Line 281 written “had a longer time” make it clear if it supposed to PFS time
3. All the tables need to be fixed, try to differ the heading and sub heading in the table and make
it aligned left so the reader did not get confused
4. The abbreviations are not fully complete
Title: Efficacy evaluation of albumin-bound paclitaxel combined with carboplatin as
neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary epithelial ovarian cancer                
Version: 1 Date: 07 Mar 2022
Reviewer:  Federica Tomao
Reviewer's report:
I believe this is an interesting paper , while it is related to an observational retrospective study
with a little number of patients recruited. It is an attractive  manuscript, mainly for the present
and future clinical applications of nab paclitaxel in ovarian cancer patients  in combinations with
other standardized drugs and possibly with other targeted molecular agents and immunotherapy.
While the use of  nab paclitaxel  in ovarian cancer is still considered as an experimental novel
treatment, many oncologist and gynecologist use frequently this agent in clinical practice due
to its safety profile, the lack of severe allergic reactions and the compliance of patients.
The manuscript is clear, well organized  and written with accettable english language. Moreover ,
it should be very interesting to improve and to increase the section of conclusions, which is
too short and I believe that it deserves more attention and critical approach, mainly considering
the increasing use of nab paclitaxel  in the treatment of ovarian cancer in the next years.
Unfortunately the bibliographic lis it is not available , for unexplained reasons and I am waiting
to check it  as soon as possible. However I suggest to insert in the list the following papers:
1)  Tomao F, D'Incalci M, Biagioli E et al.  Restoring platinum sensitivity in recurrent
ovarian cancer by extending the platinum-free interval: Myth or reality? Cancer. 2017 Sep
15;123(18):3450-3459. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30830.
2) Evelina Miele , Gian Paolo Spinelli, Ermanno Miele, et al.Albumin-bound formulation of
paclitaxel (Abraxane ABI-007) in the treatment of breast cancer
Int J Nanomedicine. 2009;4:99-105. doi: 10.2147/ijn.s3061.
Title: Efficacy evaluation of albumin-bound paclitaxel combined with carboplatin as
neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary epithelial ovarian cancer                
Version: 3 Date: 18 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Gatot N. Adhipurnawan Winarno
Reviewer's report:
dear authors and editor
I've read the revised version of the manuscript titled “Efficacy evaluation of albumin-bound
paclitaxel combined with carboplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary epithelial
ovarian cancer” and I really appreciate the author's hard work on the revised version by accepting
the suggestions that the reviewer gave.
after a careful review of revised version, I believe that this manuscript is already appropriate
to publish.
Title: Efficacy evaluation of albumin-bound paclitaxel combined with carboplatin as
neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary epithelial ovarian cancer                
Version: 3 Date: 22 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Federica Tomao
Reviewer's report:
I evaluated the authors reply to reviewers comments and  critical issues too. The bibliographic
list has been included in the manuscript.I  believe that the revised   version of the manuscript is
fine and no other replies should be done by the authors.
Title: One in ten ever-married Women who visited Health Facilities for various Reasons have
Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Harari Regional State, Eastern Ethiopia
Version: 3 Date: 03 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
I appreciate the effort made by authors to address comments provided in the previous version
of the manuscript.  Consider the following additional comments.
1. Some of the important responses (like sampling) in the point by point  response are not
included in the main document. Please review once again.
2.  As you mentioned, if you involve women who had undergone previous POP surgery,  it may
be not logical.  (may be part of limitation)
3.  Good also consider also limitations of the tool with 4 Qs.  Comparing with other studies
which are using different tools requires caution.
4. Authors should check 95% CI whenever comparing study finding with another study
Title: Correlates of cervical cancer screening participation, intention and self-efficacy among
Muslim women in southern Ghana
Version: 1 Date: 08 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Oscar Tapera
Reviewer's report:
This is a good paper with relevant recommendations that may be used in other contexts beyond
Islamic women.  It is worth publishing this work to inform CCS interventions particularly in low-
resource settings where the burden of cervical cancer is high. Please consider some suggestions
below:
- When presentation aOR- no need to put p values if CIs are given e.g (aOR = 1.32, 95%CI
1.11, 1.56)
- Proof read the manuscript again to correct/check some minor gramma errors throughout the
manuscript
- On the list of abbreviations - OR, CI and SE are not necessary to define as they are standard
measures, most readers of statistical outputs would know what they mean
Title: Correlates of cervical cancer screening participation, intention and self-efficacy among
Muslim women in southern Ghana
Version: 1 Date: 14 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Chizoma M Ndikom
Reviewer's report:
Title: This a very interesting study.
Background was written.
Some statements need to be referenced.
Line 69 -      This statement needs to be referenced
Line 72-74- This should be referenced too
Line 78- There should be a coma after 'therefore' for it to reflect the meaning you intend
Line 91-95- if this is a statement of fact, it need to be referenced. if not, it needs to be reviewed
Methods
To improve on this and make the method clearer.
Line 136- 138- I do not understand this statement. if the calculated sample size was 382, why
should  431 women participate?
151- Cronbach’s alpha or Kuder-Richardson (KR) state the one that you used.
155- the main instrument for data collection was a questionnaire - indicate if more than one
instrument used for the study
Line 169 is not relevant
Results
238 engaging in the exercise again- change to screening exercise again.
Line 273 and 274 review and rephrase
Discussion
Review some spellings
Line 392 and 393 review the spelling
Other comments are  on the body of the work.
The manuscript should be accepted after the minor corrections