Reviewer’s report
Title: KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE OF A COHORT OF HIV-POSITIVE AND 
HIVNEGATIVE GHANAIAN WOMEN AFTER UNDERGOING HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS
AND CERVICAL CANCER SCREENING
Version: 0 Date: 24 May 2018
Reviewer: Aisha Lofters
Reviewer's report:
A well-written study on an important global health topic. Some comments to strengthen the paper:
P. 5, Study Design section - It seems as if the term "this study" is used to both refer to the original 
parent-cohort study and the current manuscript under review, which is confusing. Also, the parent study  
needs to be explained in more detail. 
P. 5, Quantitative Methods - Was the quality of translation assessed? What were the original Likert 
response categories that were then grouped?
Table 2 - would be easier to read if the correct responses were highlighted. Would also suggest 
stratifying the table into the questions where women were expected to get them right due to previous 
education and others
P. 11, first paragraph - considering that there were questions that women were expected to get correct, I 
would suggest the authors break down knowledge score in terms of expected knowledge vs. 
unexpected knowledge
Table 3 - are the response options in Table 3 the response options that women were presented with?
Discussion - 1st paragraph - the first sentence regarding the original study should be clearly stated 
much earlier on. The authors say this study provides a unique perspective on the impact of health 
education, but again, it's hard to determine that as a reader without knowing what education the women  
received, and which questions they would be expected to answer correctly. 
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.
Yes
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 am able to assess the statistics
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Acceptable
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.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'
responses. 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/ ). I understand that any comments
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments
to the editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal