JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: How, when and where? A systematic review on abortion decision making in legally
restricted settings in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean
Version: 4 Date: 09 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
General Comments
This issue is very relevant in contexts where many women lose their lives as a result of abortions
performed in inconvenient conditions. Overall, the text is quite comprehensive. Thanks to the
authors for addressing this issue.
However, since the research stopped in 2019 and we are now in 2022, it would be interesting
to do one last update before publication. There are studies that might be relevant to add to your
summary, for example: ‘’Methods women use for induced abortion and sources of services:
insights from poor urban settlements of Accra, Ghana’’, Published in 2021 and highlights
important elements covered in your synthesis.
Method
Line 107 Search strategy: It would be interesting to add the research period to this part.
Results
Line 188 Figure 2: Organization of themes
It may be interesting to use arrows to make the diagram more understandable.
For the grouping of themes, other factors could be relevant to take into account, for example ,
age, living in a rural or urban area, level of education etc... for example, grouping these factors
and the cost into the role of socio-economic factors would not be  better?
In line 190 you were talking about the role of knowledge, but in the studies included, didn't they
have associations between this knowledge and other factors? If so, it would be interesting to
bring that out in the presentation of the results.
Discussion
It might be interesting to bring out concrete implications for public health policies, given that
this is a real health problem in the context studied.
Title: Positive Intervention Effect of Mobile Health Application Based on Mindfulness and
Social Support Theory on Postpartum Depression Symptoms of puerperae
Version: 3 Date: 10 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript, which falls within the aim of this Journal. In my honest
opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. Nevertheless, authors
should clarify some points and improve the discussion, as suggested below.
Authors should consider the following recommendations:
- Manuscript should be further revised in order to correct some typos and improve style.
- I would suggest to discuss in further detail the role of subthreshold mental disorders as
predictors of postpartum depression (PMID: 34652261), as well as the role of anger experience
and expression in the development of postpartum mood disorders (PMID: 28760050).
- I suggest to discuss, at least briefly, how the use of psychopharmacotherapy (PMID: 28005135)
and/or antiepileptic drugs (PMID: 26626184) may affect the investigated parameters.
Title: Positive Intervention Effect of Mobile Health Application Based on Mindfulness and
Social Support Theory on Postpartum Depression Symptoms of puerperae
Version: 5 Date: 25 May 2022
Reviewer:  Melania Severo
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I read with interest the revisions made to the manuscript, I think they have increased the quality
and clarity of the work. I have only one final suggestion. Regarding the analyses conducted with
the EPDS and the MSPSS, you respond  that "The average score of each item was used for
statistical processing of data in this study". I consider that this procedure should also be explained
explicitly in the manuscript  (for example, in the section called "Procedure and Design") because
it does not appear immediately clear. Readers familiar with the two instruments would expect
to find averages of values based on total scale scores and not on the average of individual
items in Table 2 ("Means and standard deviations for each measure of each group, pre and post
assessment"). As a result, readers may not understand why the values of the averages appear
so low or they may think there is an error. I suggest accepting the article for publication after
such revision.
Title: Positive Intervention Effect of Mobile Health Application Based on Mindfulness and
Social Support Theory on Postpartum Depression Symptoms of puerperae
Version: 7 Date: 14 Sep 2022
Reviewer:  Melania Severo
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
with the latest revisions the paper appears clearer and more enriched. To the best of my
knowledge, it needs no further revision.
Best regards
Title: Title: Status of female sexual dysfunction among postmenopausal women in Bangladesh
Version: 1 Date: 24 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Robert E Pyke
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for this important survey.
English usage needs some improvement; please have a native English speaker edit the
manuscript for run-on sentences, illogical conjunctions, dependent clauses expressed as
sentences, etc.  Particularly, “standard of living,” which usually denotes economic categories,
is used repeatedly in a way that seems instead to mean “quality of life.”  Several abbreviations
are used without first giving the proper words, e.g., FSD, CKD, and PCOS, HRT (giving the
explanatory words only as a footnote to a table is insufficient).
Methods:  don’t give details of how BMI was measured.  You say in the introduction that FSD
requires a dysfunction and distress about it, but you did not include in Methods (or Results) a
measure of sexual distress.  This is particularly damaging to the credibility of the paper given that
you did not cite what average FSFI values are for a sexually functional Bangladeshi population
of women.  Find a way to relate your results to the lower FSFI cutoff values found in some
other Asian women.  At least take one of those values and apply it to your data to determine the
prevalence of FSD more accurately.  The Malay version, in the country with an FSFI validation
study that is perhaps geographically closest to Bangladesh, requires for dysfunction on raw (not
factored) scores for FSD: desire score of less than or equal to 5; arousal of 9, lubrication of 10,
orgasm of 4, satisfaction of 11, and pain of 7.  While the validation study cited does not give a
cutoff for the total score, multiplying each domain by the appropriate factor (respectively, 0.6,
0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4, and 0.4), the cutoff score for the total may be as low as 17.5 (sum of 3.0, 2.7,
3.0, 1.6, 4.4, and 2.8, respectively)  The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): validation of the
Malay version - PubMed (nih.gov)  Survey the Asian validation studies to produce a cutoff score
that you think is appropriate rather than citing the North American/European value of 26.55.
Results: you give the FSFI domains with the highest mean scores, but tell what domain had the
lowest mean score; after all, this paper is about FSD.
Table 2.  Why is ICC given only for the orgasm domain?
The survey is cross-sectional and correlational, not a longitudinal study, so this statement is not
justified: Physical activity is an essential factor in improving sexual function.  The data permit
you to say in results that low physical activity is related to sexual dysfunction.  Conclusions
belong in a Conclusions, section, not in Results.
Discussion.  Four consecutive important sentences have no references but should, starting with
PA activates the autonomic nervous system, increasing genital blood flow and arousal, daily at
least 30 minutes of exercise could boost sexual arousal.
Title: Title: Status of female sexual dysfunction among postmenopausal women in Bangladesh
Version: 4 Date: 10 Feb 2022
Reviewer:  Robert E Pyke
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for this manuscript. This is a worthy subject to be publicized because of the distress
sexual dysfunction can cause.
Various minor items need improvement to make it publishable, however.
Introduction –
Line 56  Should the word “warn” be replaced by “with”? Otherwise the sentence makes no sense.
The sentences in lines 58 and 61 are mostly redundant. Merge them.
Line 65. Either references 7 and 8 are incomplete, or they should be explained further because
vaginal dryness and dyspareunia are leading complaints in postmenopausal women yet you fail
to mention them.
Line 71. “Draws”? Do you mean “draws near?”
Methods
136. What were your criteria for defining body mass as normal, overweight, and obese? State
them here.
147. sexual health-related personal distress is is stated to be important, but was it/how was it
measured?  If it was not measured, you must say so—and then give the data on the sexual
satisfaction domain of the FSFI, if lower than normal, as evidence of how bothersome the
dysfunction seems to have been.
Results
193. Arthritis would be expected to be a frequent condition, but you don’t mention it. Did none
of the women have arthritis?
206. “had presented in (Table 4)” should be “as presented in Table 4”?
Discussion –
251. “Although it is unusual” doesn’t make sense to me; how about shortening the sentence to
something like “How long menopausal symptoms last is individual to each woman, but research
has shown that menopausal symptoms last an average of 4.5 years following a woman’s last
period.”
It is remarkable that several risk factors were so strongly associated with sexual dysfunction:
advancing age (51-55 vs 45-50), urban vs rural, more than 4 children, homemaker vs employed;
longer duration since menopause (2-5 years vs 1 year), no hormonal replacement therapy
vs hormonal replacement therapy, and low physical activity.  Discuss the strengths of these
association in the Discussion. In particular, please add that your analysis of risk factors strongly
agrees with the data supporting HRT and physical activity. (lines 257-269)
Title: Women’s perspectives on the acceptability and feasibility of an HPV screen-and- treat
approach to cervical cancer prevention in Iquitos, Peru: a qualitative study
Version: 2 Date: 29 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
This an excellent article and important research into women's experience of being told HPV
positive and undergoing ablative therapy. Your work is in-depth and thorough and your group
is one of the few that have really delved into women's perspectives regarding screen and treat
strategies for cervical cancer prevention. This is an important contribution to the drive for
elimination of cervical cancer globally.
Title: Up-regulation of miR-133a-3p promotes ovary insulin resistance on granulosa cells of
obese PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signaling
Version: 2 Date: 24 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
In this manuscript titled “Up-regulation of miR-133a-3p promotes ovary insulin resistance
in obese PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signaling” authors claim that they have
identified a novel pathway involing MiR-133a-3p. They state that MiR-133a-3p promotes
insulin resistance in the ovary of obese PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signaling
pathway. There are some issues that needs to be addressed before considering the manuscript.
The study is poorly written with scant details where necessary like statistics and more detail
when not required like in embryo selection etc. which are irrelevant to this study
1. Title needs to be specific as they have studied only on granulosa cells
2. They chose miR-133a-3p based on their previous microarray findings, did they publish it if
so they need to cite it in the manuscript.
3. They need to clearly articulate the different groups. Were the controls and PCOS group age
or BMI matched? Separating normal and obese PCOS should be considered as a sub-group
analysis. This should  be dealt with separately and explained clearly. Also instead of calling
G1 and G2 etc. call them by their actual name. Do they have enough power to make the
subgroup analysis? G1 is a combination of G2 and G3, this should be clearly stated and analyzed
accordingly.
4. What kind of statistical analysis did they use?
5. Figure 1 show that there is no change between the group, but the text says otherwise, what
is the p value?
6. The western blot is of no value as they have not shown Akt levels, only pAkt does not mean
anything. They need to normalize pAkt with Akt to make any meaningful conclusion. There is
no control (G1)
7. They have not investigated any of the signaling molecules properly. They lack non-phospho
levels and some lack proper controls
Title: Up-regulation of miR-133a-3p promotes ovary insulin resistance on granulosa cells of
obese PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signaling
Version: 2 Date: 09 Jun 2022
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer comments
Manuscript Title: Up-regulation of miR-133a-3p promotes ovary insulin resistance in obese
PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signalling.
Author of the manuscript: Xiaoman Yang et al.
Reviewer: Mohd Ashraf Ganie, MBBS, MD, DM
The manuscript titled: “Up-regulation of miR-133a-3p promotes ovary insulin resistance in
obese PCOS patients via inhibiting PI3K/AKT signalling” is a well conceptualized manuscript.
The study explains the differential expressions of miR-133a-3p in the GCs of obese and normal
weight PCOS patients, and their potential mechanism on ovary IR via PI3K/AKT signalling. The
study paves way for future in vivo studies using different animal models for further validation.
However, there are several concerns that need to be clarified before proceeding further.
Major comments:
1. The title needs to be modified as per results and conclusions of the study
2. The authors must explain how the sample size was calculated.
3. The authors must clear that, which age group was chosen for this study
4. Evaluating subjects by population specific BMI (Asian BMI) may give more accurate results.
5. The authors need to mention whether cases and controls were age matched or BMI matched.
6. In the statistical part, mention software used for data analysis
7. In results part, please write in detail each heading and subheading
8. There are good numbers of punctuation mistakes.
9. Concern on the units used.  All the units used in the manuscript should be clearly checked
and presented as per journal style.
10. Modify the conclusion part by concluding your own results. Avoid speculations.
Title: Exploring the perception and socio-cultural barriers to safer sex negotiation among
married women in Northwest Nigeria
Version: 0 Date: 20 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a very interesting paper with a very important topic on safer sex negotiation. Safer sex is
indeed a crucial component of relations. However, the authors could improve the presentation
of their manuscript by observing the following:
1. The reviewers included most of the required elements needed for the qualitative study. The
justification to explore the safer sex negotiations is not well presented in the abstract section. It
is important for the authors to indicate safer sex negotiation is explored in what context is it for
HIV prevention, for quality relationships, or for reproductive and maternal health?
2. Why key informant interviews in exploring safer sex? Can the authors elaborate on
this further? Usually, key informants are used to ascertain information that can only be
communicated by some specific people. Safer sex can be collected by interviewing couples in
the general population.
3. Did the authors explore the dynamics of safer sex within polygamous marital relations?
4. The first statement of the "conclusion" in the abstract is not clear. Kindly re-write
5. The contents under the study procedures are more related to methods. The tool is not clearly
described. An in-depth interview is usually the main tool for key informant interviews, but this
is not mentioned.
6.  The background section states that safer sex negotiation is particularly important to promote
women’s sexual health but there are more contributions emanated from safer sex than just
promoting sexual health. The authors may review the available literature for more insights.
9. The author tried to describe the design of the study. However, it is important to indicate
whether this was a phenomenological study  since it explores safer sex negotiation from the
participant's view points.
Title: Exploring the perception and socio-cultural barriers to safer sex negotiation among
married women in Northwest Nigeria
Version: 0 Date: 21 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer’s Report
TITLE
1. The title of the manuscript should read - Exploring the perception and socio-cultural barriers
to safer sex negotiation among married women in Northwest Nigeria
ABSTRACT
1. There should be some descriptive explanations of the sample size under the method section.
2. How did the researcher select the participant from the six states of Northwest Nigeria in
2021for the KII as stated?
METHODS
1. What is the justification for conducting KIIs in six out of the seven states in the Northwest
geo-political zone?
2. Which procedures were followed in selecting the participants for the four KIIs conducted in
each of the aforementioned states (rural and urban areas)?
3.  I do not think that conducting KIIs is enough to make a conclusion in this paper. Why did
you not include Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) or In-depth interviews (IDIs)?
4. FGDs and IDIs would have been better options considering the study population.
I have to stop at this point. However, there are other observations which include;
Do you think that information from opinion leaders such as religious leaders, women leaders,
community leaders and matrons who are not directly involved based on the title of this paper
(married women) is appropriate?
What is the strength of this study in comparison with previous studies? The limitation section
should include the strength.
What are the ages of the respondents? It is important these are reported.
Title: COVID-19 vaccine and Menstrual conditions in female: data analysis of the Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System#VAERS#
Version: 1 Date: 08 Apr 2022
Reviewer:  Zouina Sarfraz
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, this study is very well conducted and does have some merit in my opinion.
However, what is missing is the causality. There is correlation but no causality. The topic is of
imminent concern and I am aware of the studies in this area, but to my knowledge, this study
does not merit publication in the journal. It does not meet the editorial criteria for publication
(i.e., objectives, methods, presentation, etc.).
I do wish you the best in finding a home for this paper.
Title: COVID-19 vaccine and Menstrual conditions in female: data analysis of the Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System#VAERS#
Version: 1 Date: 04 Jul 2022
Reviewer:  Silvana Mula
Reviewer's report:
The authors examined a very current and interesting topic, which found little space in scientific
literature. Despite its novelty, the paper needs some improvements prior to publication.
- The draft needs significant improvement in language and correction of grammatical mistakes;
- The background of the study is somewhat weak, and it seems more focused on the diffusion
of vaccines per se. Although there are few studies on this topic, there are some recent works
that could be useful to authors to expand the introductory part of their paper (e.g. doi:10.1097/
AOG.0000000000004695; doi: 10.1515/med-2022-0452; doi: 10.1093/ije/dyab239);
- The analyses are adequate;
- The discussion and conclusion sections are exhaustive; however, among the limitations, I’d
mention the fact that the study did not consider whether the participants have contracted COVID
or not. In fact, some recent studies have examined the association between COVID infection
and irregularities in the menstrual cycle (e.g., doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.020). Therefore, it
is also plausible to hypothesize that menstrual irregularity may derive (also) from COVID and
not (only) from the vaccine.
Minor comments:
- Line 115: FDA needs to be spelled out;
- Line 342: the authors should consider explaining what “Bell's palsy” is.
Title: Predicting IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders
Version: 1 Date: 16 Jun 2022
Reviewer:  Maurina Geru
Reviewer's report:
Although the subject matter has already been widely discussed in the literature, the strengths
of the article are the large population sample  and the health care system in which the study
was conducted.
The possibility of repeating IVF cycles numerous times in other states is limited by the
balance between costs and benefits. In this regard, I recommend that this article  DOI:
10.1080/14737167.2021.1910026 be included to further explore the issue of cost, which
is a priority in most states. The search for alternative resources, such as biosimilars, has
unfortunately been an unsuccessful attempt.
I would also suggest implementing the materials and methods section with more details.
Title: Predicting IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders
Version: 1 Date: 11 Jul 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
I read with pleasure this article, which falls into my scientific area of interest. I appreciate the
methods and presentation. However, I would like to rise a debate regarding the clinical efficacy
of such results.
For this reason, I propose to reject the article, but I would like to receive feedback from the
authors regarding the questions risen.
I appreciate the effort spent from the authors in arguing such debate. However, I have some
concerns that prevent me from giving an acceptance on this article. One concern is about the
clinic role of such results:
1) In literature there are hundreds of articles regarding this specific topic, in my opinion the
results obtained by the authors do not bring any new features.
2) Female age is the most important parameter to consider when approaching to a new IVF
treatment. Several authors demonstrated that the higher the female age is, the lower the IVF
treatment efficacy will be. Bologna Criteria published in 2011 during ESHRE (European society
of human reproduction and embryology) conference clearly underline this.
3) The study considers as inclusion criteria only the IVF cycles, which yielded up to three
oocytes, while the definition of poor responder comprehends other parameters, included in the
Bologna criteria.
On the other hand is interesting to compare the IVF efficacy between under 40 years old poor
responders and the ones who are over 40 years old. I suggest to the authors to focus more on
that specific topic.
Title: COPING WITH DYSMENORRHEA: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PERIOD
PAIN MANAGEMENT AMONG STUDENTS WHO MENSTRUATE
Version: 4 Date: 26 Aug 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for all of your work on this paper and your detailed responses. I am happy that this
revision satisfies my queries - apart from one rogue remaining statistic on page 11 line 218 (81%
of respondents...)
Title: Association between Serum Vitamin C and HPV Infection in American Women: A cross-
sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 19 Jul 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authers, Thank you for submitting your work to the journal of "BMC Women's Health".
Here are my suggestions:
(1)  In the part of "Background", the authors mostly cite the appropriate literature of Human
papillomavirus (HPV) infection but fail to fully synthesize the previous studies about Serum
Vitamin C and HPV Infection. More detailed background need to add for showing current
researches advances.
(2) The methodology section description is too simple, which should be described separately.
(3) A more exhaustively analyzing is recommended, such as subgroup analysis, forest map, et al.
(4) English should be improved substantially and checked by English native working in the
research area.
(5) Please update references.
(6) In table 1, the first  column name is " Variables" not  Exposure.
(7) There is no explanation of how the weights are for NHANES sampling weights.