Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Are women adequately informed before gynaecological surgery?  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Jan 2017  
 
Reviewer: Miles Murphy  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The authors are to be cong ratulated for investigating the important topic of surgical informed 
consent.  
 
I have a few comments regarding the manuscript:  
1. In the Methods the authors mention a "complementary questionnaire" in the first paragraph, 
but they don't explain what this i s until the third paragraph.  This leaves the reader a little 
confused.  It would be helpful to provide some description of what this questionnaire is when 
first mentioned.  
2. In the Discussion there is no description of potential weaknesses of the study.  One of the 
biggest weaknesses of this study is that of recall bias, and this should be listed in the 
Discussion.  Patients are given a great deal of information during a p reoperative counseling 
visit that can often be overwhelming and hard to digest.  It could be that the surgeon does 
mention some information on sexual function etc at this time, but that the patient does not 
remember.  
This study would benefit by adding a co mparison of survey responses from surgeons regarding 
what they feel they have communicated on these topics.  I understand that that is not particularly 
feasible at this time, but it should be discussed as a potential limitation of the study.  
 
3. The autho rs stress that much of the data regarding the impact of the various surgeries can 
have on the various functions of interest is CONFLICTING.  And yet the authors imply that 
the surgeons are failing to tell the patients what impact their surgery will have on  these 
various functions.  Could it be that there is no agreed upon conclusions that they can pass 
onto their patients.  I suppose the authors believe that the surgeons when presented with 
discordant information should pass that discordant information alon g to their patients, but is 
this really valuable information for the patients?  This conundrum should be flushed out more 
in the Discussion.  
 
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 whi ch 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 publi cation 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 curr ently 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 repo rt 
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 understan d 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