Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Results of a pilot study in the U.S. and Vietnam to assess the utility and acceptabi lity of a  
multi -level pregnancy test (MLPT) for home monitori ng of hCG trends after assisted 
reproduction  
 
Version: 0 Date: 29 Oct 2016  
 
Reviewer: John Townsend  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I very much enjoyed the article as it supports innovation and efficiency in critical reproductive 
health services, and forms part of a history of engaging clients in thier health  decisions and 
delivery.  I did have a few questions and comments that might complete what is already a 
valuable and tightly written article.  1) What were the chacteristics of users with discordant 
results?  2) What information was provided to users if re sults were discordant?  3) What are 
approximate costs of each treatment by site?  4) Please confirm that all users interpreted the 
results of the pregnancy test correctly.   Were there any challenges with reliably reading HCG 
serum levels?  5) What challen ges exist for changing policy and practice in this area?   
 
I look forward to see the article in print.  Best wishes.  
 
 
 
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 o r 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 Englis h 
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 a n Open Acces s 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