JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Correlation and predictive value of systemic immune-inflammation index for
dyslipidemia in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome
Version: 5 Date: 02 May 2024
Reviewer:  Ali B. Roomi
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for asking my opinion #about #the #manuscript #entitled ##"The predictive value
of systemic immune-inflammation index for dyslipidemia in patients with polycystic ovary
syndrome". #
#I believe that this manuscript should #be #major revision:#
Q1. It is very important to change and modify the title. the #title #is not appropriate.#
Q2. Are the objectives and the rationale of the study #clearly #stated? #
#Q3.# In the abstract, the research gap was not clearly #stated. In #addition, the authors need to
rewrite the study #objectives #to be more academic writing
#Q4. In the introduction, include the  #study's significance #and #novelty. What makes the study
different #from #the rest #and #what #does it add to the current knowledge?#.#
Q5. In the introduction, the authors #should #have #explained #the #purpose of this study and
the #existing gaps #in #this field #and #explained why this study was #conducted.#
#Q6. Are the methods clear and replicable? Do all the #results presented to match the methods
described?#
Q7. If relevant are the results novel? Does the study #provide an advance in the field? Is the
data plausible?#
Q8. References are relevant, correct, and not #recent. #The #number #of #references should be
increased.# #please add some #references. since this is a scientific #review, all the sentences
need #to be supported with #references.#
This study is very beautiful. I liked the sequence and #enjoyed #reading. Please add more
references on similar #studies.#
#Q9. There are a lot of grammatical errors. This #must #be #taken #care #of and addressed.#
#Q10. What are the limitations of the study?# A description #of #limitations is missing at the
end of the discussion #section.#
Title: Correlation and predictive value of systemic immune-inflammation index for
dyslipidemia in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome
Version: 6 Date: 06 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Ali B. Roomi
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for asking my opinion #about #the #manuscript #entitled ##"Correlation and
predictive value of systemic immune-inflammation index for dyslipidemia in patients with
polycystic ovary syndrome". #
#I believe that this manuscript should #be #major revision:#
Q1. It is very important to change and modify the title. the #title #is not appropriate.#
Q2. Are the objectives and the rationale of the study #clearly #stated? #
#Q3.# In the abstract, the research gap was not clearly #stated. In #addition, the authors need to
rewrite the study #objectives #to be more academic writing
#Q4. In the introduction, include the  #study's significance #and #novelty. What makes the study
different #from #the rest #and #what #does it add to the current knowledge?#.#
Q5. In the introduction, the authors #should #have #explained #the #purpose of this study and
the #existing gaps #in #this field #and #explained why this study was #conducted.#
#Q6. Are the methods clear and replicable? Do all the #results presented to match the methods
described?#
Q7. If relevant are the results novel? Does the study #provide an advance in the field? Is the
data plausible?#
Q8. References are relevant, correct, and not #recent. #The #number #of #references should be
increased.# #please add some #references. since this is a scientific #review, all the sentences
need #to be supported with #references.#
This study is very beautiful. I liked the sequence and #enjoyed #reading. Please add more
references on similar #studies.#
#Q9. There are a lot of grammatical errors. This #must #be #taken #care #of and addressed.#
#Q10. What are the limitations of the study?# A description #of #limitations is missing at the
end of the discussion #section.#
Title: Bridging the Knowledge Gap: Educational Needs of Iranian Women for Virtual Breast
Cancer Prevention: A Qualitative Study
Version: 2 Date: 11 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
Add “a qualitative study” to the topic.
The sentence related to the purpose in the abstract section needs to be revised.
It is not necessary to state the inclusion criteria in the abstract.
In the abstract, write the qualitative study approach and data analysis method.
Reference number 4 is not valid. Use epidemiological references in reliable journals.
In the introduction, the necessity of conducting the study is not clear.
What was the researcher's concern for conducting the study? Why did you conduct this study
with a qualitative approach?
In the method section, specify the study design exactly.
Complete the interview questions?
How was the access to the participants?
Where was the exact location of the interviews?
In the rigor section, reference 35 should be related to Guba and Lincoln.
The data analysis part is not written. This part should be explained step by step with full
explanation for the reader.
Describe the rigor criteria in full. What actions did you take for each criterion?
Reference number 34 is not related to the original reference of Granheim and Lundman's
approach.
Rewrite the method section based on qualitative research guidelines. Unfortunately, the method
section is very poorly written.
What specifically were the results based on your culture? Emphasize these results and fill them
in the discussion section.
In the discussion section, the discussion is not done from the author's point of view.
In the discussion section, use references from the last 5 years.
Title: Prognostic significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal
B breast cancer
Version: 2 Date: 27 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this interesting study "Prognostic significance
of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal B breast cancer".
However, I have some comments and recommendations:
Comments:
Title: - Is appropriate for the content of the article.
Abstract:- Represents a suitable summary of the work.
Article content:- The methods and results have been well explained.
Conclusions:- Are justified on the basis of the study.
Recommendations:
Discussion:- Mention the strength of the study.
References:- Stick to the format of the journal.
General:- Revise language, grammar and syntax.
Title: Prognostic significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal
B breast cancer
Version: 2 Date: 27 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Maria Lúcia Moleiro
Reviewer's report:
I believe the work is well organized and the data well analysed. Nevertheless, the impossibility to
analyse the different chemotherapy approaches chosen, and the unavailability of target therapy
for HER-2 , are an important handicap to accept the OS survival calculated nowadays.
Title: Prognostic significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal
B breast cancer
Version: 2 Date: 28 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study is a common clinical ultrasound technique and is relatively simple study not
innovative.
1. The introduction is too brief and does not detail current research.
2.The research methodology is relatively simple.
3.The references are too outdated to be of much reference value.
Title: Prognostic significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal
B breast cancer
Version: 2 Date: 30 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Hojjat Farahmandnia
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper and the content is very good but I suggest the paper can be improved
in the following ways: Abstract
-Please correct all parts of the article according to the guidelines of the journal authors guideline
In the methods section please bring year of performing of this study, sampling methods and data
analysis methods -In the conclusion part, it is necessary to specify the researcher's proposal to
improve the conditions and use of the beneficiaries
Introduction
Please bring the following items 1- Definition of the research problem 2- The magnitude and
importance of the study variable 3- Expressing the necessity of conducting the study Finally,
the practical purpose of the study should be stated. Methods
Please report the details scoring and validations of study tools
Discussion
In the discussion section, it is necessary y to compare the main results of the study with the
results of other studies in this field. To strengthen the article, especially in the introduction and
discussion section the following studies are suggested, please used and add to this manuscript
references.
- Investigating the burden of disease dimensions (time-dependent, developmental, physical,
social and emotional) among family caregivers with COVID-19 patients in Iran
-Emotional Intelligence and Self-Efficacy among deputy's administrative staff of Kerman
University of Medical Sciences
-Medical tourism development: A systematic review of economic aspects
Conclusion # What are your suggestion for future studies? Best regards
Title: Prognostic significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with advanced luminal
B breast cancer
Version: 2 Date: 30 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Phuc Nhon Nguyen
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for your topic. I have some comments:
-Why the study was conducted in three years? Sample size calculation was not performed.
-Please explain for the cut-off point using 50-year-old age.
-Please explain for the definition of unknown clinical stage.
-Number of tumor lesion was absent.
-Number cases of recurrence and death was missed.
-BMI, familial history of breast cancer and related cancer, and concomitant diseases, and blood
count test (hemoglobin, white blood count) should be added to Table 1.
-In table 2, percentage (%) should be added besides frequency (n). Hazard ratio for clinical stage
at initial diagnosis should be adjusted with other risk factors.
-The various treatments (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormone therapy) were a major bias
for clinical outcomes.
-Statistical tests should be mentioned as foot-note under each table.
-Figure 1 is not good presented. The figure’s quality should be improved.
-English editing service is strongly required and grammatical errors should be checked.
-Almost all references are more than 10 years. Please updated.
-PE should be replaced by MPE in conclusion.
Title: Meta-Synthesis of the Motherhood-Related Needs of Women with Multiple Sclerosis
Version: 0 Date: 17 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
I read your manuscript with great interest.
Motherhood and family planning are relevant topics for both, women with MS and health
professionals. Information on the needs of women with MS in these topics will help to shape
the counselling.
The background summarises the current state of the topic and explains why the study is
necessary. The research question seems to be appropriate. The study design and methods are
appropriate for the research question. The findings of the study are summarised in the discussion
and compared with other results from this research field. The four main themes are addressed.
In some sections (methods in particular) I would strongly recommend reporting further details.
Thank you for your contribution.
Title: Meta-Synthesis of the Motherhood-Related Needs of Women with Multiple Sclerosis
Version: 0 Date: 19 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
Firstly,  I congratulate the authors for the well-written article and important theme.
MSclerosis is associated with a substantial burden growing on society due to the high cost of
the available treatments and poorer employment prospects and job retention for patients and
their caregivers. Therefore, this can also impact patients' and families' decisions to accept and
advance in the motherhood journey.
Overall, it is a coherent work and worth publishing. That said, I would like some comments to
be considered and better analysed.
First of all, it is difficult for me to understand the inclusion and exclusion criteria; despite the
search terms, they need to be more explicit and clarity.
Secondly, why articles like ref: 61: "Multiple Sclerosis and Parenting: How Our Children
Respond to Diagnosis, Treatment, and Daily Life" were included? This could be a probable bias
since it is not related to the journey of motherhood but the path after. I recommend not including
it and reassessing the results. Or if you can justify its inclusion (more complex), please consider
its bias (including sample size for a qualitative study or study design: n=50 with survey). The
same question applies to some of the final 14 selected articles, with the need to justify/clarify
their inclusion better (table 1, despite necessary,  needs some extra information in this concern).
Finally, in the discussion, it would be important to reflect on a few points:
*clinical characteristics of the disease (women normally have a better prognosis vs men; does
this impact motherhood?
Were the subjects only women with the disease, or is it a challenge when the man is the career
of the disease? Was this access in any matter?
What are the fears, uncertainties about the future, desires, doubts about the progeny that might
exist?
*Did You consider an analysis of differences in the challenges of motherhood in atypical or
atypical forms (including progressive ones, with a worse response or current pharmacological
alternative?)? Because in, one time does matter.
Another question regarding pharmacology and survival or reduction of outbreak occurrences
is whether there are differences between the results of the studies presented pre-2018 and
post-2018.
*Thinking about the response of different health systems and legal support for motherhood,
or possibly existing responses, the authors present work from different countries: Italy, Iran,
Australia, Canada, Sweden, etc.), which may affect the reactions and responses in qualitative
studies especially and therefore influence the results obtained. That being said, in relation
to challenges encountered in motherhood, is there any difference between different realities:
healthcare and social support systems? This might be reflected in the lines of insecurity and
perceptive needs.
Title: Meta-Synthesis of the Motherhood-Related Needs of Women with Multiple Sclerosis
Version: 2 Date: 26 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
I congratulate the authors again on their work.
I also want to apologize for the extra delay in reviewing.
The authors' work is of significant value. They reviewed the article and sought to answer the
questions raised, which were well addressed. Overall, the article is good, and I believe it should
be accepted for publication.
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
1- Thanks to the authors of this article. It seems that if in table 1 the risk factors such as marriage
age; the frequency of marriage and consumption of smoking and alcohol, etc., were investigated,
and maybe there were recommendations in this field.
2 What are the limitations of the study and the strengths of your study?
3- What are the practical results of the study and what are your recommendations?
4-In the discussion section, there is no comparison with the results of other studies and countries.
It seems that comparing with other countries; this part will be stronger and more practical.
5- In compliance with the announced items. The article is printable.
Best Regards
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this interesting study "Prevalence of high-risk
Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with squamous cell inflammation
among women in Gabon".
However, I have some comments and recommendations:
Comments:
Title: - Is appropriate for the content of the article.
Abstract:- Represents a suitable summary of the work.
Article content:- The methods and results have been well explained.
Conclusions:- Are justified on the basis of the study.
Recommendations:
Discussion:- Mention the limitations of the study.
References:- Stick to the format of the journal.
General:- Revise language, grammar and syntax.
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you very much for the opportunity to review the manuscript.
The manuscript titled "Prevalence of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Genotypes and Viral
Load Correlated with Squamous Cell Inflammation Among Women in Gabon" investigates the
prevalence of high-risk HPV genotypes and their correlation with squamous cell inflammation in
Gabonese women. This study is highly relevant due to the significant impact of HPV on cervical
cancer rates, especially in low-resource settings like Gabon. The research is conducted by a team
from various institutions in Gabon and Cameroon, highlighting a regional effort to address this
public health concern. The study uses a cross-sectional design, enrolling 399 women from the
Libreville University Hospital Center and the National Public Health Laboratory. It employs
multiplex fluorescence real-time PCR for HPV genotyping, providing robust and sensitive
detection of HR-HPV genotypes. The findings reveal a 26.1% prevalence of HPV among the
study population, with a predominant presence of HR-HPV genotypes such as HPV-16, HPV-52,
HPV-18, and others. A significant correlation was found between HR-HPV viral load and
squamous cell inflammation (r=0.977, P=0.001), suggesting that higher viral loads may be
associated with increased inflammation and potential cancer risk. The manuscript effectively
places its findings within the broader global context of HPV prevalence, emphasizing the need
for improved screening strategies in Gabon. Even though the manuscript has been written well
and in the scope of the journal, there are several points that should be addressed in order to
improve the quality and transparency of the manuscript.
- I would suggest discussing the pathophysiological pathways linking HPV infection to
inflammation and neoplastic progression in more detail in the discussion section.
- The discussion section would benefit from a broader discussion of the clinical implications
of the findings, particularly regarding how these results might influence current screening and
management practices for HPV in Gabon and similar settings.
- The study could provide more detailed recommendations on practical interventions to improve
HPV management in Gabon,like community education or vaccination programs etc.
I would be happy to review the revised manuscript again.
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
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. Methodology is accurate
and conclusions are supported by the data analysis. Nevertheless, authors should clarify some
point and improve the discussion citing relevant and novel key articles about the topic. Authors
should consider the following recommendations:
- Manuscript should be further revised by a native English speaker.
- It is a fairly good study; however, the manuscript needs extensive editing, and we suggest you
get assistance from a professional. Moreover, the title should reflect the research question, and
the Keywords should be based on MeSH terms.
- Inclusion/exclusion criteria should be better clarified.
- The authors have not adequately highlighted the strengths and limitations of their study. I
suggest clarifying these points.
- What are the actual clinical implications of this study? it is important to report the results
obtained by the authors in the context of clinical practice and to adequately highlight what
contribution this study adds to the literature already existing on the topic and to future study
perspectives.
- Referring to the following PMID: 37873540, the authors should discuss how cervical
intraepithelial abnormalities and cancer development may also depend on biological problems
arising as a result of complex molecular disorders within the vaginal space, in addition to the
widely known causal effect of human papillomavirus infection. For example, reactive oxygen
species and free radicals are still unknown causative agents and are probably very important
factors in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer development.
- Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment, cervical cancer remains a significant health
problem, particularly among young women of reproductive age. The authors should discuss
fertility-sparing treatments for cervical cancers and in particular, referring to the following
PMID: 38674254, should discuss fertility-sparing treatment options for cervical cancers larger
than 2 cm.
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Phuc Nhon Nguyen
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for topic concerning women’s health. The paper revealed the viral genotype of HPV
and cytology in the cervical samples of pap-smear as well as its correlation. The paper has some
concerns:
-The study population is unclarified. All the women admitted at UHC and NPHL from 3/2024
to 5/2024 were included (n=399)?
-The study did not use the sample size calculation for the power of the study.
-Inclusion and exclusion criteria were missed. Thus, it is a bias to frequency of HPV-type (low
and high risk group).
-The statistical method was insufficient.
-The presentation of data is poor.
-The definition of inflammation or infection is missed.
-LSIL (CIN-1), HSIL (CIN-2,-3), cervical cancer were not mentioned.
-Colposcopy and cervical biopsy were not further investigated in this population.
-One participant may be infected by multiple types of HPV. But it is absent in the result.
-The baseline characteristics of study population is insufficient, thus no risk factors were
relevant.
-English editing is strongly required.
In general, the current paper did not provide the novel gap in the literature, except for a strategy
in management of helth-care at author’s center.
Title: Prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus genotypes and viral load correlated with
squamous cell inflammation among women in Gabon
Version: 4 Date: 15 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This article provides valuable insights into HPV prevalence and its correlation with squamous
cell inflammation, contributing to public health awareness in Gabon. It utilizes a reasonable
sample size, effective use of PCR for HPV detection, and appropriate statistical analysis, adding
credibility to its findings. However, the study has some weaknesses. The purposive sampling
method could introduce bias, limiting the generalizability of the results. While the study claims
no grade of cervical neoplasia was identified, it could have benefited from including additional
diagnostic criteria. Lastly, the statistical analysis reports an unusually high correlation (r=0.977),
which might indicate overfitting or errors in interpreting the data, raising concerns about its
validity. Addressing these issues would strengthen the overall impact of the study.