Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Knowledge on cervical cancer and perceived barriers to the uptake of
HPV vaccination among health professionals.
Version: 
0 
Date: 
13 Jun 2020
Reviewer's report:
Title - This might need to be rephrased because it is seen as though the health
professionals are unable to provide vaccination to people because the people had
lack of knowledge /awareness of HPV vaccine.
The title does not fully reflect the work. Most respondents were aware of HPV
Vaccination. Lack of awareness was just an option which should not really form
a title. Also, the study looked more at uptake by the health professionals not the
administration of the vaccine. There is need to look at the content and review the
title. 
Suggested title: Knowledge on cervical cancer and perceived barriers to the
uptake of HPV vaccination among health professionals.
Abstract: Page 2 line 37 and line 49 seem to be similar results on screening
uptake 29.2% need to cross check this. 
Also, line 42 and line 51 on vaccination
uptake '19.8% got vaccinated'. This needs to be crosschecked.
Page 2 line 56 - it can be reworded as: Also, 77.2% of respondents in this/our
study are willing to be vaccinated and recommends HPV vaccination to their
friends and family members.
Page 2 line 59 - it can be reworded as: Lack of awareness and poor knowledge
on cervical cancer vaccination availability could be the possible hurdle impeding
the uptake of HPV vaccine among health professionals. 
This need to totally review the abstract as it does not flow very well. Sentence
should not start with figures. 
Introduction, page 3 line 20 - no reference was included.
Result, page 6 line 33 - most common reason for not getting vaccination reported
on our study was lack of awareness???? 
Do you mean lack of awareness of the availability of the vaccine in the hospital? 
Do you mean health professionals do not even know the vaccine exist? 
Or are they looking at acceptance by their patients or what.
Discussion, page 13 line 1 - 
it can be reworded as: when all variables were
combined /put together, only the variables on knowledge of HPV vaccination ....
Generally, this study is not clear. They are no congruence between body of the
work and the title. The information is not well presented. The idea is good but
seems the work was presented in a hurry. Authors need to thoroughly review and
present the work. 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
Yes
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the
authors.
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
No
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you
recommend an additional statistical review?
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects
require further assessment in your comments to the editors.
I recommend additional statistical review
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following
questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or
salary from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way
gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now
or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the
content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of
the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this
paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing
interests' below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available
under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY License (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial
office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note
you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and
confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we
will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this
review directly to Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would
like to take advantage of this service, please click on the “Yes” option below.
Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted
to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons, you
will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be
able to recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the
Review Data to generate derivative metadata for the benefit of Publons and you
as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such information. For
example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help
editors to identify candidate reviewers. Please find the details of processing in
Publons’ privacy policy 
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes