Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Correlates of sexual inactivity and met need for contraceptives among young women  in 
Ghana  
 
Version: 0 Date: 03 May 2017  
 
Reviewer: Sarah Saleem  
 
Reviewer's report:  
It is a nicely written paper and informative too. My main comments are related to Methods and 
results sections.  
In the Methods section, under subheading of 'variables' -- depend ent variable is defined 'unmet 
need'.  However, same term 'unmet need' is then taken as one of the categories of dependent 
variable. The two categories of non -users are defined as 'not using modern contraceptives but 
sexually active (having unmet need) and  second category as abstinent. Third category is of users 
or met need. The write up is confusing, it is advised to the authors to not to use the terminologies 
interchangeably and may be, call the dependent variable with a different name and clearly indicat e 
reference category as unmet need.  
Table 2, for multinomial logistic regression analysis, ORs are given with SE. It is suggested not to 
give SEs but to give ORs with CIs.  Also there is no need to give Nagelkerke R2  as this is not 
adding to the knowledg e and has limited value in the interpretation of the results.  Similarly in the 
results section, at places reference category of the dependent variable needs to be interpreted 
carefully.  
It would be nice of authors describe their conceptual framework and hypothesis if possible and 
then explain their results of multinomial analysis related to the conceptual framework  
 
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 supporte d 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 spe cify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
I recommend additional statistical review  
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
Acceptable  
Decla ration 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 l ose 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 you r 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 agre e to the open peer review policy of the journal