Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: How is patient -centred care conceptualized in women ’s health: A scoping review  
 
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2019  
 
Reviewer: Reviewer 2  
 
Reviewer's report:  
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:  
OBJECTIVE - Full researc h articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several 
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)  
Yes - there is a clear objective  
 
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for the 
objective?  
Yes - the approach is appropriate  
 
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to 
allow confidence in the  results?  
N/A - no experiments or analyses  
 
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?  
N/A - there are no statistics in this study  
 
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not 
overst ated?  
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable  
 
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently 
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further 
revisions be made to make t he work technically sound?  
Yes - current version is technically sound  
 
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:  
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors were responsive to previous comments. Overall, the 
scoping review was well planned and executed. The findings are clearly describ ed. The 
discussion is helpful in delineating future directions for research; however, the authors may want 
to emphasize the point that PCC focuses on the individual, attending for her / his uniqueness, 
which  may account for the limited number of framework s or studies that are specific to women.  
 
REQUESTED REVISIONS:  
Discretionary - emphasize the point that PCC focuses on the individual thereby attending to the 
individual needs; this may account for limited PCC frameworks specific to women.  
 
ADDITIONAL REQU ESTS/SUGGESTIONS:  
No 
Are the methods appropriate and well descr ibed?  
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.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Decl aration 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.  
 
This reviewer has been r ecruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with  
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer has  
agreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution License  
attributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within  
a specified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewer  
recommendation.  
 
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 ac cepted 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://creativecommo ns.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