Title: The impact of text message reminders on cryotherapy uptake among women testing
positive for HPV in western Kenya: A prospective cohort study
Version: 2 Date: 17 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
• Is the paper technically sound?
•
• This paper is technically sound.
•
• Are the claims fully supported by the experimental data? If not, what further evidence is
needed?
The claims are supported by the data generated. However, the presentation of qualitative data
is providing data which can be exploited to trace the respondents.  “We carried out two FGDs
in July 2018, which each consisted of ten participants who had been screened during Phase 1
of the trial and had opted for a cell phone-based strategy (text or phone call) for their results
notification.” Quotes are attributed to respondents and presented as: (Participant 3, 27-year-old)!
This kind of presentation should be revised to reduce chances of retracing the respondents.
Lines 222 to 224 belongs to the methodology section.
Under section of likes of text messaging ““I preferred text because I’ll have the opportunity
to go through it first then give it to my husband to share the good news that I tested
negative.” (Participant 6, 50-year-old)” what will happen if results are positive? The team should
consider how contrasting likes and dislikes can be combined since in the section on dislikes,
contrasting messages are presented.
Methods
“To avoid spillover, we identified communities with non-adjacent borders that had not
participated in the first phase of the study.” Did the team ask any questions to check whether
there was spillover? If yes, what were the findings? The statement of spillover seems to suggest
the researchers wanted to control for contamination. If this is the case, it is not how having non-
adjacent communities addressed the issue of contamination. Could this be the reason why there
were no differences between enhanced and non-enhanced texting?
In the methodology section, it should be stated clearly the kind of results shared. It is only later
in the manuscript (line 390-391) that some attempt is made to state the results shared were either
HPV Positive or Negative.
Line 270 to 273 needs rewording to address dislike about text messaging rather than choice of
phone calls.
Under study limitations, was the lack of difference between enhanced and non-enhanced texting
because non-enhanced texting had already achieved the desired results?
The impact of text message reminders on uptake of cryotherapy among women testing positive
for HPV in western Kenya
Conclusion of abstract “Modifying the content and number of texts as an enhanced text
messaging strategy was not sufficient to increase follow-up in an HPV-based cervical cancer
screening program in western Kenya. A one-size approach to mHealth delivery does not meet
the needs of all women in this region. More comprehensive programs are needed to improve
linkage to care to further reduce structural and logistical barriers to cervical cancer treatment.”
Current paper: The impact of text message reminders on uptake of cryotherapy among women
testing positive for HPV in western Kenya
Modifying the content and number of texts as an enhanced text messaging strategy was not
sufficient to increase follow-up in an HPV-based cervical cancer screening program in western
Kenya. A one-size approach to mHealth delivery does not meet the needs of all women in this
region. More comprehensive programs are needed to improve linkage to care to further reduce
structural and logistical barriers to cervical cancer treatment.
• It is very confusing to see the same paper being reviewed appearing on pubmed!
• Is the statistical analysis of the data sound?
• It is not clear why analysis was restricted to bivariate analysis.
•
• 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?
• Discussion
• Results need to be discussed with extant literature. See examples:
•
Sanchez Antelo V, Kohler RE, Curotto M, Viswanath KV, Paolino M, Arrossi S. Developing
SMS Content to Promote Papanicolaou Triage Among Women Who Performed HPV
Self-collection Test: Qualitative Study. JMIR Form Res. 2020 Mar 6;4(3):e14652. doi:
10.2196/14652. PMID: 32032940; PMCID: PMC7084289.
•
• Joseph NT, Namuli A, Kakuhikire B, Baguma C, Juliet M, Ayebare P, Ahereza P, Tsai
AC, Siedner MJ, Randall TR, Ngonzi J, Boatin AA. Implementing community-based human
papillomavirus self-sampling with SMS text follow-up for cervical cancer screening in rural,
southwestern Uganda. J Glob Health. 2021 Dec 25;11:04036. doi: 10.7189/jogh.11.04036.
PMID: 35003710; PMCID: PMC8709902.
• Paolino M, Sánchez Antelo V, Kohler RE, Viswanath K, Arrossi S. Implementation of an
mHealth intervention to increase adherence to triage among HPV positive women with HPV-
self-collection (ATICA study): post-implementation evaluation from the women's perspective.
BMC Womens Health. 2023 Jun 23;23(1):332. doi: 10.1186/s12905-023-02475-0. PMID:
37353835; PMCID: PMC10288763.
•
• Could the manuscript be revised to address any potential limitations?
• Yes.