JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Sexual and reproductive health and gender-based violence among female migrants in
Morocco: a cross sectional survey
Version: 1 Date: 23 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors it is an interesting article, reveals an unexplored situation among migrants in
Morocco. Is easy to understand and has direct language.
Some suggestions.
Study design
• There was any sample calculation
Study population
Where do took place the interview? was during the consultation? after the consultation?.
Who applied the questionnaire? was the physician?
Data collection
• Questionnaire was in only one language?
• What if the participants does understand the language? .
• There was an informed consent signed?
• How do you grant the confidentiality of information?
• How do you avoid to interview twice the same patient on repetitive consultations or in other
health settings?
• Thus, the high rates of SGBV is this sample representative of all migrants population.
• For a better understanding could be useful to have questionnaire as supplementary files
Results
Line 129 DRC is Democratic Republic of Congo?
Line 167 It is possible to have the rate exchange with USD ?
Discussion
Please revise, is repetitive with the findings there is no easy to find inside core ideas.
Line 236 Is there missing an idea ?
Title: Sexual and reproductive health and gender-based violence among female migrants in
Morocco: a cross sectional survey
Version: 4 Date: 21 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you so much to address my suggestions, I have no comments to the main solved questions.
I do consider that discussion
Main topics of discussion are
• Communication barriers
• Financial support
• Level of instruction
• Stigma and lack of confidence
• Coordination on migrants’ support
• Prenatal care
• Use of contraceptives
• Public policies for migrants
The last 3 ones are addressed more properly. However, the other ones seem to be isolated and
unchained one with each other, not supporting the core ideas of the discussion. My suggestion
is to revise and give more structure to this part
Title: Intention to Take COVID-19 Vaccine and Associated Factors among Pregnant Women
Attending Antenatal Care at Public Health Facilities in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia
Version: 1 Date: 15 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this manuscript. It is well written, however,
I think some major issues need to be considered:
1. The author should add more implications in the conclusion. Line 46-47: “Therefore,
strengthening interventions that increase the knowledge and attitude towards the COVID-19
vaccine may increase the intention to take it”. However, the intention was significantly
associated with other variables such as residency, gestational age, parity.
2. In the introduction, the authors should mention information about COVID-19 vaccine
strategies in Ethiopia, especially for pregnant women (e.g what kind of vaccine was for pregnant
women, how the vaccine program was implemented? The rate of people vaccinated and so on).
Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has been affecting for people over 2 years so the author
should mention the consequences of COVID-19 on people in Ethiopia, especially for pregnant
women
3. Line 83-85 “Studies in Ethiopia also revealed that COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among
pregnant women were ranges from 18% in Debre markos to 70.7% in southern Ethiopia [23-26].”
The author should emphasize why is it important to conduct this study. More details about some
conclusions have differed significantly and cite references (Line 86-92)
4. In the method, line 107-108, the author showed that the sample size required 612, however,
the final sample was 590. The author should provide the inclusion and exclusion criteria and
explain why the participants did not respond.
5. The author should mention more detailed the items to assess knowledge and attitude
6. Line 147-149:the author should cite references
7. Line 174: the author mentions the results of knowledge and attitude. However, table 3 did
not show the findings about attitude.
8. The author should add more information on the reason why participants did not intend to get
the COVID-19 vaccine.
9. The author should add the limitation of the study
Title: Intention to Take COVID-19 Vaccine and Associated Factors among Pregnant Women
Attending Antenatal Care at Public Health Facilities in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia
Version: 1 Date: 10 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Mulualem Silesh
Reviewer's report:
The authors have conducted a study entitled "Intention to Take COVID-19 Vaccine and
Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care at Public Health
Facilities in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia." I encourage them to consider the following
points as they revise the manuscript.
Title: The title is clear. Why did you want to conduct research on willingness when there have
been so many studies on vaccine acceptance among pregnant women?
Cover page: Add name of correspondence (L12) in the authors list
Abstract
1. Well written
Introduction
1. What makes your study differ from others? Also, what is your recommendations to the
researchers since you couldn’t get new from the added new variables? L86-90
Methods
1. Please the section as Study design, period and area. Also, remove G.C
2.  Clearly rewrite/add the study population and eligibility criteria in separate section.
3. Please Clarify; why you conducted with Multi stage sampling technique?  Do you think
intention would be affected by type of study setting?
4. Operational definition: How many questions used to measure your outcome variable?
5. Please specify where the pre-test was conducted?
Result
1. Please remove ‘Having Children’ from Table 1 and add in the Table 2.
2. The finding of attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine is not found in the Table 3
Discussion
1. The discussion substantially needs rewriting; clear and logical justification
2. Please add the limitations of this study?
Conclusion:
1. Well written
Title: Intention to Take COVID-19 Vaccine and Associated Factors among Pregnant Women
Attending Antenatal Care at Public Health Facilities in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia
Version: 3 Date: 31 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for such careful consideration of my comments. I have just minor comments
after which the manuscript should be ready for publication. The author mentioned “This study is
not without limitations, despite its many strengths” (line 260). The authors can consider present
strengths before mention limitations.
Title: Understanding coping strategies of mothers living with HIV who care for children living
with HIV: a qualitative study in Indonesia
Version: 1 Date: 20 Dec 2022
Reviewer:  Sri Yona
Reviewer's report:
Overall, the manuscript can provide new idea about how MLHIV live with CLHIV..
Recommendation: provide more detain in methodologi, such as why this study was in Jogja? who
did the interview? if more than one reseach team did the interview, do you have any interview
guideline, so all team member can have it before did interview?
why all the interview was usinng wa call? provide more reason, although the author mention
that this is participants; choice . Usually, people like to be interviewed face to face..
was the interviewer live far from Jogjakarta?
how about rigor?
Title: Understanding coping strategies of mothers living with HIV who care for children living
with HIV: a qualitative study in Indonesia
Version: 1 Date: 06 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Overall, the article is of good quality but needs improvement as follows :
1. Explain the scientific background and experience of the research team in conducting in-depth
interviews
2. To guarantee trustworthiness and rigor, are there other researchers who check for accuracy
and ensure interpretation to ensure data reliability throughout the process?
3. Coping strategies formulated in research based on findings need to be categorized based
on theory, whether they are included in Self-discrimination coping, self-distance coping, self-
blaming coping, or other categories.
4. Several statements need to be reviewed again before making claims that have not been
reported in previous studies, as in the sentence "connecting KLHIV with other KLHIV through
groups and activities is another new strategy used by mothers in this study, which has never
been reported in previous research"
Title: Scoping review of the association between bacterial vaginosis and emotional, sexual and
social health.
Version: 2 Date: 11 Aug 2022
Reviewer:  Thane Chambers
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for responding to feedback from the previous round of peer review. I'm wondering if
this systematic review should be reframed as a narrative review instead? As I mentioned in my
previous review, the search strategy could have been much improved if you had worked with
a librarian/information specialist, the thematic analysis of qualitative data is not well described
and appear to be largely descriptive rather than analytical, and  there was no critical appraisal
of included studies done. I think the topic is important and that this summary could be useful.
The implications derived from the studies you did review do have implications for practitioners
and patients so it would be a shame if this study wasn't published. However, I believe that the
issues described above do make me hesitant to describe this study as a systematic review. And if
published as such it would be described as a low quality systematic review. If it was re-written as
a narrative review, there would be fewer methodological weaknesses in it and the findings could
still be made available. And there wouldn't be that much re-writing required. My last comment
is about the finding that women felt distress because of a lack of clinical information about BV.
I'm wondering if in the Further implications section the need for better/clearer information from
practitioners or trusted sources should be added?
Title: Scoping review of the association between bacterial vaginosis and emotional, sexual and
social health.
Version: 4 Date: 18 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Thane Chambers
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for revising your paper. In the previous round of peer review I recommended revising
your paper so that it could be published as a narrative review rather than a systematic review.
The authors appear to have met me halfway by abandoning the systematic review idea and have
now reframed their paper as a scoping review. I'm not convinced that this is the best approach as
I still feel that a narrative review would be more appropriate. Despite the authors claim that they
"search[ed] the literature in a methodological way." I don't see much evidence of that. In my
first review of this paper, I highlighted a number of issues with the search strategy, one of the
largest being that a large number of controlled vocabulary terms which were readily available
to the authors were not used. And some of the issues with the search methods are still not
described adequately in the methods section (e.g. which databases within the Web of Science
Core Collection were searched?). I strongly note that if the authors wanted their paper to be
taken seriously by peer reviewers, spending some energy and time on ensuring that the methods
to retrieve the data would have been well spent. And I encourage them to involve a librarian or
information specialist as part of their research team in future systematic and scoping reviews.
Title: Scoping review of the association between bacterial vaginosis and emotional, sexual and
social health.
Version: 4 Date: 25 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript has improved greatly in clarity. Many of my comments have been
addressed directly or through revisions in the text. Reframing this manuscript as a scoping review
rather than a systematic review was a great decision and resolved many methodological issues.
I have no additional comments or revisions to suggest.
Title: Intimate partner violence linked to gambling: Cohort and period effects on the past
experiences of older women
Version: 0 Date: 21 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Virve Marionneau
Reviewer's report:
Thank to to the authors for this highly important and well written article. It was a real pleasure
to read. There has been no past research on gambling-related IPV victimisation among older
women and their past experiences. This research fills the gap and raises many highly important
issues.
Reading the manuscript it is striking how far we have already come in terms of women's rights,
as well as the denormalisation of IPV and gambling. It also highlights how important it is to
continue to research these topics and to further reduce the negative public health impacts of
these harmful practices.
I think the paper should be published almost as it is. I only have a few very minor questions or
thoughts that you might consider:
- Regarding the gendered service responses: I was wondering if any of this was impacted by
the fact that most service providers (police officers, doctors) were also male? Was there any
discussion on this?
- I understand that most women did not want to leave their relationship because of the financial
consequences as well as the will to maintain a facade. I am wondering if there were also some
legal determinants of health involved - for example, what was the custody law like? Was there
a chance they could have lost the custody of their children?
I have also done some research on the spouses of gamblers in my country. Although they were
mainly younger, one problem was also related to the fact that if their gambling husband got joint
custody, they could not control what happens to the children while they are at their father's.
I think some kind of a brief discussion on the legal determinants of health might be useful in
the discussion.
- The limitations of the study state that you could not consider abusive relationships at an older
age because many of the women had eventually left their abusive relationships. It would be very
interesting to also hear about what gave them the strength to do this in the end.
Thank you again. I really enjoyed your paper, and I hope you keep working on these very
important topics.
Title: Intimate partner violence linked to gambling: Cohort and period effects on the past
experiences of older women
Version: 2 Date: 17 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Heidi Stöckl
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the thorough response to my comments. I really like how the article now reads and
find it really informative, especially since the intersecting issues are now very well highlighted.
I am very happy now with it going further to publication without further revisions requested
from my side.
Title: Is there a link between the autonomy of women and maternal healthcare utilization in
Nigeria? A cross-sectional survey
Version: 1 Date: 27 Sep 2022
Reviewer:  Chioma Oduenyi
Reviewer's report:
1. The definition of “autonomy of women was not well established” in the abstract.
2. The definition of Autonomy of women should be very clearly established with clear variables
for measurement. For instance, women's decision-making appears to be the focused variable
and education didn't come out strongly as a variable of measurement of women’s autonomy but
surfaced in the discussion
3. Low maternal health care service utilization is already established so may not be a new finding
so emphasis on discussion should focus clearly on establishing the linkage between autonomy
of women and utilization of services at the health facility. This may be easier to measure if the
variables that define women's autonomy are clearly grouped
4.The manuscript may benefit from further disaggregation of the variables being studied by
geopolitical zones since context-specific issues and demographics were reported to play a huge
role also.
5. I guess the program and policy interventions should be geared toward increasing the autonomy
of women as the new finding and not the utilization of services which has many interventions
focusing on them
Title: Is there a link between the autonomy of women and maternal healthcare utilization in
Nigeria? A cross-sectional survey
Version: 3 Date: 21 Nov 2022
Reviewer:  Chioma Oduenyi
Reviewer's report:
1. The reviewed discussion section showed the linkage between the autonomy of women and
the utilization of services at the health facilities mostly from reviewed literature and not from
the direct findings of the study. This linkage should be drawn clearly from the study findings to
be able to draw a logical conclusion. This needs more revision.
Title: Association between endometriosis and sexual satisfaction among a sample of Lebanese
women
Version: 0 Date: 20 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
The article was well-designated and properly written. It might be interesting if more emphasis
were placed, possibly in the background, on why the emotional state associated with
endometriosis may be different in Lebanese women. Also, it would be more informative to
explain which social and psychological characteristics may positively affect anxiety and couple
satisfaction.  With  these corrections, in my opinion, the article would have more scientific
relevance and would give more impetus for action in other countries where endometriosis is a
cause of psychological stress in both women and couples.
Title: Association between endometriosis and sexual satisfaction among a sample of Lebanese
women
Version: 0 Date: 28 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Abdessamad Benalla
Reviewer's report:
interesting study, with very objective results,
however, this study would be very interesting if we integrate sexologist and social workers
on the field, since the sexual arousal and sexual practices would be better developed by these
practicians.
Through the questionary, I did not see specific questions about sexual arousal, since that there
are women that are more superficial in the sexual relationship, and could have their pleasure
without penetration, thus, giving a feed back about this category of women is so important to
explore in association with endometriosis.
Other women category is important to include in this study, which are partnered women without
marriage in Lebanon, because of the psycho-social impact that they have in an Arab country.
Title: Women in a Safe and Healthy Urban Environment: Environmental Top Priorities for the
Women’s Presence in Urban Public Spaces
Version: 4 Date: 21 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
The proposed manuscript "Women in a Safe and Healthy Urban Environment: Environmental
Top Priorities for the Women’s Presence in Urban Public Spaces" is very interesting topic . The
aim of the study is to increase awareness in society about the importance of women's presence
in urban spaces. Authors correctly address  research question  and hypothesis. They analyze
if there is significant correlation between environmental and physical components in the city
and women's presence. The overall strategy seems to be a good one, however I think that data
sample is to small according to the fact that they have only 50 participants in the study. Authors
needs to estimate if the proposed article is review or case study or research study. It is not clear
especially in the introduction where authors include extensive literature review. The results are
analyzed and interpreted correctly. They use adequate statistical methods. However, I strongly
recommend to separate results from discussion.
The manuscript is  written well but it seems to me that it is not easy to read. Therefore I
recommend the article should be shorten in order to emphasize the main message  of the article
by addressing strategies to increase women's presence in urban spaces.
Also I suggest to authors  to check the proposed manuscript by a native English speaker.
BMC Women's Health is fully opened for articles  from developing countries. The article is
under the scope of the BMC series which strongly recommend population and epidemiological
studies.
The proposed manuscript  should be revised in order to consider acceptance for publishing
according to suggestions.
1. article type : review or case study
2. data sample is  small
3. clearly separate results from discussion
4.  article should be shorten to be more clear
Title: Women in a Safe and Healthy Urban Environment: Environmental Top Priorities for the
Women’s Presence in Urban Public Spaces
Version: 4 Date: 30 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
The author did not provide thematic definitions for what constitute personal and environmental
factors. There is need for an operational definition.
For figure 2, the authors didn’t indicate the interaction between variables and the isn't a clear
indication of what the outcome variable is. The interaction between the variables aren't clearly.
The author failed to clearly state the sampling technique use and the procedure they used to
select the first participants, no illustrations of how the sample size where determined.
The descriptive statistics could have been presented in a frequency table to make the results
readable and clear.
What scientific justification underline the use of T-test to determine the degree of importance
of variables. The authors need to scientifically prove this statement. As in my candid opinion,
that statement is misleading
The tables aren't clearly presented and makes reading difficult.  What specific correlation was
performed. To make the whole study clear to the readers, the authors much indicate how the
various variables were measured in the study.
Title: Women in a Safe and Healthy Urban Environment: Environmental Top Priorities for the
Women’s Presence in Urban Public Spaces
Version: 6 Date: 19 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
Authors made a great effort in improving the proposed manuscript.
The only suggestion is to reduce unnecessary figures in the Results. Also, I strongly suggest to
exclude Table 9. from Conclusion.
The proposed revised article  is ready for acceptance after those changes.
Title: Gender-based violence and its associated factors among internally displaced women in
Northwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 30 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you very much for sharing this article with me. This study is very important and I think
this should be published. I have several minor comments.
1. I recommend the authors to report summary statistics for multivariate analysis such as log
likelihood, LR chi^2, and pseudo r^2.
2. Are there any variation based on study sites? If so, I recommend including it as part of bivariate
and multivariate analysis.
3. I would also recommend the authors to discuss study findings in the context of existing policy
context. What would be useful policy recommendations?