JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: HPV Self-Collection for Cervical Cancer Screening among Survivors of Sexual Trauma:
A Qualitative Study
Version: 0 Date: 28 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Rakiya Saidu
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript titled "HPV Self-Collection for
Survivors of Sexual Trauma: A Qualitative Study" . The manuscript addresses a significant
public health issue by exploring the perspectives on clinic-based cervical cancer screening
and attitudes towards  high-risk HPV (hrHPV) self-collection for cervical cancer screening
among survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV). Overall, the manuscript is well-written and
addresses an important issue in women's health. The  findings from this study have important
implications for increasing screening rates and reducing cervical cancer disparities in this
vulnerable population.
My recommendations to improve this manuscript are as below:
1. Title: To improve the context of the title, I suggest it is reviewed to "HPV Self-Collection for
Cervical Cancer Screening among Survivors of Sexual Trauma: A Qualitative Study" .
2. Methods: Provide more details about the participant recruitment process, including how
potential participants were informed about the study (was it by flyers, announcements etc).
In terms of the development and validation of the interview guide,  describe how coding
disagreements were resolved.
3. In the discussion section, table 3  laid out recommendations to deal with patients concerns.
However, it will be good to offer more specific recommendations for healthcare providers and
policymakers on implementing hrHPV self-collection in practice, particularly in this vulnerable
group.
4. The limitations of the study were mentioned in the discussion section, in particular the
homogeneity of the sample, which may limit its generalisability to other groups, and potential
recall bias. it will be important to suggest directions for future research to address these
limitations.
Title: HPV Self-Collection for Cervical Cancer Screening among Survivors of Sexual Trauma:
A Qualitative Study
Version: 0 Date: 29 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Erica Liebermann
Reviewer's report:
The authors present important qualitative findings regarding cervical cancer screening and HPV
self-collection among survivors of IPV. The manuscript is well written and clear. My comments
are suggestions for minor edits and language consistency.
Abstract: line 63, missing a “who” with “currently reside in Oregon”
P5 line 122,missing “the” before “OHSU Women’s Health Research Unit Newsletter”
Introduction:
Suggest adding a brief summary of US cervical cancer screening guidelines to provide context
for the eligibility for primary HPV screening on p5
Methods: are well described and conform with the standards for reporting qualitative research
Should decide whether you will use hrHPV self-collection or simply HPV self-collection
throughout. You start with the former and then on p 6 line 128 use the latter-should be consistent.
Results:
“This theme” prefer naming Theme 1 in the paragraph or even naming the theme in the narrative
vs just relying on the heading.
Check for consistency in language/grammar, e.g., trauma informed vs trauma-informed is used
in different places.
In Theme 3 you have insurance as a barrier in both individual level and health system level
barriers. Should decide where this fits; it is often considered a health system barrier.
Theme 4: should specify which barriers in particular were alleviated with HPV self collection.
For example a barrier such as lack of insurance would not be alleviated by a self-collection
approach.
Discussion:
“IPV population” is awkward wording, suggest rephrasing with more person-centered language
P12, suggest defining the lithotomy position as you do the bimanual exam
P13 suddenly use HPV self-sampling when you have used self-collection throughout the
manuscript
Though I can see where the “recommendations” are useful in the discussion, results shouldn’t
be introduced for the first time in the discussion section. Suggest finding some way to introduce
this aspect of your findings in the results section even if you want to preserve this as a
recommendations section in the discussion.
P15. It is my understanding that current FDA approval is for HPV self-testing done in clinic
settings only.
Please define all abbreviations on first use (e.g., OB/GYN)
Title: Causality between Neuroticism Personality Clusters and Female Reproductive Diseases
in European Population: A Two-Sample Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study
Version: 1 Date: 03 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
I would like to express my gratitude for the invitation to review the manuscript. Upon careful
reading of the article, I find the research topic to be intriguing, and the article itself seems to be
well-designed and well-written. Nevertheless, I have a few minor recommendations that could
enhance the quality of the paper.
In the discussion section:
Provide more detailed explanations of how dysregulation of the HPA and SNS axes might lead to
infertility and endometriosis. Are there specific hormonal pathways or stress-related biomarkers
involved?
Incorporate a broader range of studies to contextualize your findings. Discuss whether similar
associations have been observed in different populations or with other psychological traits.
Provide more detailed explanations of how chronic stress leads to HPA axis desensitization and
the subsequent effects on cortisol secretion and inflammation.
Elaborate on the controversies regarding neuroticism's effects on the SNS and HPA axes, citing
specific studies that support differing viewpoints.
While the discussion attributes possible causes to physical changes and social pressures, it
could benefit from a more detailed exploration of the underlying biological or psychological
mechanisms linking PCOS to increased worry.
Elaborate on how these findings could be used in clinical settings. For example, could screening
for neuroticism traits help identify individuals at higher risk for reproductive diseases.
Title: Causality between Neuroticism Personality Clusters and Female Reproductive Diseases
in European Population: A Two-Sample Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Huiqing Ding
Reviewer's report:
The authors investigated causal effects between neuroticism personality clusters and
reproductive diseases using a bidirectional Mendelian design study. The main conclusion is that
three neuroticism personality clusters exerted definite impacts on at least one specific female
reproductive disease. In general, the study is well-designed and the manuscript is well-written.
However, several points about results require further clarification.
1. The abstract lacks key results. The current result contents are conclusions.
2. The letters in the flowchart are too small.
3. F statistics formula lacks a description of abbreviations in formulas.
4. “fix-effects” should be fixed-effects.
5. Several grammatical errors: “was used for screen IVs in those diseases, ”
“, the IVW method detected it can”.
The use of tenses needs revision.
6. Use the same number of digits for results in the main text and figures.
7. The number of cases and prevalence of diseases should be given in the demonstration of
findings (Figures 2-3). Without this information, a static is nothing.
The key results should be provided in the manuscript other than the supplementary materials.
The current arrangement of information dampens a fluent reading.
8. Figure 3 shows that 1.01 of OR has statistical significance. By my professional intuition, such
a small OR value is seldom statistically meaningful. The author should give more information
as mentioned above.  
9. The manuscript gives too much background knowledge and on the contrary too little
knowledge about the analysis process.
10. Too many contents in the discussion part stray away from the main findings.
Title: Causality between Neuroticism Personality Clusters and Female Reproductive Diseases
in European Population: A Two-Sample Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study
Version: 3 Date: 31 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Huiqing Ding
Reviewer's report:
The author has addressed all of my concerns. I have several additional suggestions.
1. The reverse analysis uses the same estimate(OR) as the forward analysis, which faciliates the
comparability between two methods.
2. Remove the column in the tables contents of which are all the same. “Method”
Title: Awareness of Down Syndrome Screening Among Educated Muslim Women Is
Associated With A Favorable Attitude Toward Testing.
Version: 1 Date: 24 Apr 2024
Reviewer's report:
Review Comments to the Authors
Is the paper technically sound?
Its good research on Down Syndrome Screening among women in KSA – Single Center study.
Mention the null hypothesis in the Statistical Analysis part.
Are the claims fully supported by the experimental data? If not, what further evidence is needed?
You have mentioned as an Observational Cross-Sectional Study Design. If you have conducted
the study from 1 January 2021 to 28 February 2021 and now if you have written this manuscript,
mention it clearly.
The eligibility criteria (i.e. about participants) should be mentioned in the Methodology section.
(Is it all pregnant women or a sample of them if so - randomly selected or not…)
Should elaborate methods by which the questionnaire was standardized.
In most of the sentences you should replace patients with ‘antenatal mothers/participants’.
Is the statistical analysis of the data sound?
Yes.
I have an understanding that , Only 41.0% of the participants declared being aware of prenatal
screening of D.S., (i.e. 178 was aware of any one screening test for D.S as mentioned in Table
2). Mention this clearly in the document.
From Table 1, I observe antenatal women had previous children with D.S (11), another baby
with congenital anomalies (21), family history of   congenital anomalies other than offspring
(35). These 67 should have been grouped separately for analysis while associating with outcome
variable.
In Table 4, Cronbach’s alpha is used to assess the reliability or internal consistency of the items
and the scale in your measurement tool (questionnaire).
For all the significant P-values replace the superscript S with ‘*’ in all the tables.
Redo the Fig 1 – the background should be white to have discrimination and change the bar
with bright colors.
Does the availability of data adhere to the expected standards of your research community?
Yes
Are the claims appropriately discussed in the context of previous literature?
Yes
Could the manuscript be revised to address any potential limitations?
Yes. Minor corrections can be done in the article and sent for publication.
Title: Awareness of Down Syndrome Screening Among Educated Muslim Women Is
Associated With A Favorable Attitude Toward Testing.
Version: 3 Date: 25 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Great. The manuscript has significantly improved, mashalalh.
Two comments:
1- Line 226: DSS --> please standardize D.S.S.
2- Figure legend: Figure 1. Favorability Of Down Syndrome Prenatal Screening in Candidates
Who Reported Awareness % --> Figure should be improved.
Title: Can general exercise training and pelvic floor muscle training be used as an empowering
tool among women with endometriosis? Experiences among women with endometriosis
participating in the intervention group of a randomized controlled trial
Version: 1 Date: 26 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for your interesting study. The use of exercises for to alliviate symptoms of
endometriosis is unfortunately still too little known and hardly researched. The development
of a corresponding programme is therefore very welcome. However, I would like to make the
following comments regarding the study design:
1. I suggest publishing the results of the interviews only. In my view, the survey of
physiotherapists did not provide any relevant information. The data you collected does not show
any reason for the low participation rate, so it remains unclear to what extent the results are
representative. It would be interesting to know the reasons for or against the use of specific /
general exercises for women with endometriosis. However, the data you have presented does
not provide an answer to this question.
2. The interviews conducted with those women with endometriosis did, however, provide
interesting new information. Unfortunately, the methodology of qualitative research has not
been implemented correctly.
a. Qualitative research describes a method used in science to collect and analyse non-
standardised data. A small, non-representative sample is usually used with the aim of gaining
deeper insights into their decision-making criteria and motivational structures. The number
of study participants is determined by what is known as theoretical saturation. Theoretical
saturation is reached when data collection and analysis no longer yield any new findings.
A randomised controlled survey and evaluation of different target groups is therefore not
methodologically appropriate.
b. The approach you have chosen is also not appropriate in terms of content, as both groups took
part in the interdisciplinary pain management course. This is also confirmed by your results,
which predominantly relate to both groups.
c. My suggestion is therefore to evaluate all the interviews with the women from the excercise
group and to provide a comprehensive description of the statements made by these women,
particularly with regard to their reservations, fears and concerns about the excercises. Experience
has shown that 10 participants are too few. You would therefore have to check whether saturation
is already occurring even with this small number of cases.
Best wishes.
Title: Can general exercise training and pelvic floor muscle training be used as an empowering
tool among women with endometriosis? Experiences among women with endometriosis
participating in the intervention group of a randomized controlled trial
Version: 1 Date: 12 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations, the publication is very important and interesting.
1. You might want to add in the title what countries this review covers i.e. Nordic countries
(Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, and Finland)
2. Verse 137 - state which version of the R package was used, and refer to the R package
literature.
3. In the discussion, I suggest adding a reference: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12082862
because endometriosis is not just a disease that is only in the pelvis.
4. After the discussion, it is worth adding what limitations this publication has.
Title: Can general exercise training and pelvic floor muscle training be used as an empowering
tool among women with endometriosis? Experiences among women with endometriosis
participating in the intervention group of a randomized controlled trial
Version: 3 Date: 15 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations on a very interesting article but
1. Please define the research hypothesis of this study. Only the target is given.
2. Dear authors article is very intersting and valuable but there is no statistical analysis. There
are many statistical methods that allow you to present the obtained results, for example, as basic
descriptive characteristics, figures, graphs/boxplots. Please apply some statistical tool to present
your results.
Title: Exploring sexual life enrichment: A journey into strengthening well-being for women
post-menopause through qualitative study
Version: 2 Date: 12 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Lauretta Luck
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. This is a contemporary topic with increasing
interest in the literature. It was interesting to read findings from the experiences of menopausal
women rather than results from quantitative studies. . This work is logical, methodologically
sound and clearly written. There are a few comments for your consideration.
Background
It is unclear what “improving the capabilities of couples” means. It would be good to clarify this.
Materials and design
The inclusion and exclusion criteria are well defined. For your consideration. In many countries
marriage is inclusive of same sex couples. It might be good to more precisely specify the
inclusion criteria i.e. define what is meant by marriage.
Data Collection
The statement “Data were collected through purposive sampling based on the objectives” relates
to sampling not data collection. Semi structured interviews are data collection. It would be good
to clarify that the purposive sampling was the sampling strategy.
This part of the sentence needs re-writing to improve clarity please “ … the researcher by posing
a question extracted from their statements … “
Rigor
It is unclear what multiples sources means in this sentence “…using multiple sources to ensure
access to sufficient information ..”. It seems that all your data were from the interviews.
Findings (rather than results)
Theme 1
It is unclear what is meant by “ … one of the suitable approaches for raising relationships
between spouses”
Discussion
There is quite a bit of work in the discussion is repeats the findings of the research rather
than demonstrating how the findings are new, different and add to the extant literature. There
are clearly new findings in your research, particularly given it captured the experience of
menopausal women rather than quantitively measuring these constructs. What has this paper
added to the literature. For example, consider some of the work on menopausal women’s quality
of life.
This sentence is unclear “It is shown that the lowest rates of sexual disorders observed in couples
who reported having a very good relationship with their spouse and with the decrease in the
quality of couples' relationships, the percentage of sexual dysfunctions increased”
Strength and limitations
It might be good to add something about transferability (also from Guba and Lincoln).
Title: Exploring sexual life enrichment: A journey into strengthening well-being for women
post-menopause through qualitative study
Version: 3 Date: 31 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Kate O'Reilly
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper again. Please see suggestions below:
Given the inconsistent use of the term menopause and post-menopause in the broader literature I
suggest that the authors define post menopause in the background section of the paper. Referring
to the STRAW guidelines has previously been suggested. I suggest the authors avoid using the
term data saturation and consider the richness of data - refer to Braun and Clarke. At times in
theme one the authors are still referring to menopause period. This needs to be revised to ensure
consistency with the definition. My suggestion to to remove the term middle aged couples as
post menopause is inclusive of a wider range of ages. If using the term a definition needs to
be included.
In theme two it is noted that there are only quotes from clinical experts.  It is suggested that
this may need to include data from women post menopause to ensure the lived experience is
included rather than this being advice from clinicians. Considering their ages these experts may
themselves not be post menopause. If this theme remains as it is then I suggest that it needs to
be clear that this is a theme only arising from clinicians data.
Rather than using the term postmenopausal women I suggest using the phrase "women post
menopause" to ensure person first language and to avoid an inadvertent suggestion that women
are defined by their menstrual phase.
I suggest removing the term middle aged women in the discussion and replacing  this with "the
care for women should..."
I suggest the authors soften the language that states: Sexual relationships are one of the most
influential factors in marital happiness, and if unsatisfactory, they can lead to feelings of failure
and insecurity [24].  The term most here I suspect is not supported in the literature. It may be
important but is it the MOST influential. I suspect the literature would refer to financial security
as a very strong influencing factor. Further in in the discussion you highlight the following
"Additionally, it has been shown that for many elderly individuals, physical closeness and
intimacy may be more important than sexual activity " which contradicts the above statement.
In the strengths and limitations section including the experts is only seen as a strength. consider
the limitations that this may bring as the age of the experts suggests they may not have had the
lived reality of post menopause themselves and what is their experience in working specifically
with this demographic. Another limitation is that this is a heteronormative demographic and
how could these findings be extrapolated to  same sex couples.
Title: Exploring sexual life enrichment: A journey into strengthening well-being for women
post-menopause through qualitative study
Version: 3 Date: 08 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Lauretta Luck
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. Thank you to the authors for their work
responding to the reviewer’s feedback.
Please consider these minor amendments;
“Enrichment programs are proposed as one of the solutions to improve the quality of life. These
programs are comprehensive counseling or education designed …”
“Unwillingness to continue participation in the study was the sole criterion for exclusion. “
“ .. often becomes a source of problems and conflict … "
It would be good to put the Table titles above the table not below them.
Title: Ideal Body Image and Socioeconomic Factors: Exploring the Perceptions of Kenyan
Women
Version: 2 Date: 19 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
The title: Since no information was collected about the socioeconomic status of the study
participants, I suggest that the title be changed to” Ideal Body Image and Socioeconomic
Factors”
The background of the study is adequate and is supported by relevant literature, however, Ziraba
et al.
(2009) can be replaced with the latest studies. Although traditional and cultural factors have
been cited as contributory factors towards the development of obesity, they interact with other
factors embedded under the social determinants of health, including the food environment. I
suggest that you add a paragraph highlighting these factors
Title: Ideal Body Image and Socioeconomic Factors: Exploring the Perceptions of Kenyan
Women
Version: 2 Date: 09 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for the opportunity to review the article tilted: Ideal Body Image and Socioeconomic
Status: Exploring the Perceptions of Kenyan Women
Please find the attached document with minor comments. The article is well written I recommend
it to be   published after addressing those minor comments.
Title: Ideal Body Image and Socioeconomic Factors: Exploring the Perceptions of Kenyan
Women
Version: 2 Date: 10 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript has an appropriate title and  an appropriate methodology has also been used.
Results have been presented in a lucid manner and in such a way that there are no identifiers
of the study participants.
The major strength of this manuscript appears to be the outcome of the study that emphasizes the
importance of giving attention to traditional and cultural sensitivities in designing prevention
for non-communicable diseases for countries in Africa.
Suggestion for further studies was mentioned but this could be more focused and articulated to
emphasize that this will reduce some of the limitations of this study.
The manuscript will benefit from language editing.