Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Mothers' autonomy and childhood stunting: evidence from semi -urban communities in 
Lao PDR  
 
Version: 0 Date: 24 Apr 2018 
 
Reviewer:  Marilyn  Scott  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
This is a very interesting study that demonstrates that several dimensions of maternal autonomy 
influence the odds of stunting in 1 -4 year old children living in a matrilineal system.  I have one 
major comment, and a few smaller suggestions.  
 
 
Major Comment:  
 
Regarding the scoring of decision -making power, the authors scaled their responses on with wife 
only as the most autonomous value, then shared decision -making, then husband only.  I have a 
few comments regarding this.  First, it is important  to indicate whether all women in the study 
had husbands who lived with their wives.  Second, is there a possibility that shared decision -
making may be more beneficial with regard to child growth, and if so, might the absence of an 
influence of decision -making on stunting be a consequence of the assumption that "highest 
autonomy" (that is, complete control on decisions) is optimal.   
 
 
Minor Comments:  
 
1. page 4, lines 9 -16:  suggest rephrasing to highlight benefits of improving maternal status in 
reducing st unting.   
 
2. page 4, line 60:  The implication is that attaining higher social status is driven by economic 
status.  It would seem that in the matrilineal system, this may not be as relevant.   
 
3. page 6, first paragraph:  The methods section should includ e the variables that were part of the 
questionnaire.  Of the controlling variables listed in the statistical methods section, assets are 
mentioned, but there is no information about how this was measured, and it is not included in 
Table 2.  Also, it is imp ortant to note how information on the child's age was obtained (such as 
birth date according to child's health card).  
 
4. page 7, line 38:  1 -5, not 1~5.   
 
5. page 7 -9:  In each of the paragaphs that define the different forms of autonomy, it would be 
helpf ul to mention that responses to individual questions were used, as well as a combined score.  
I realize that the combined scores are explained on page 9, but it would make it easier to follow 
the methods if this was explained earlier.   
 
6. Page 9, line 31:   include "multivariate" before logistic regression analysis  
 
7. In Table 1, it would be helpful to indicate the sample sizes for the 3 data columns.   
 
8. Page 13, first paragraph:  It might be useful to mention that maternal height and infant sex 
continued  to be significant through all subsequent models.  
 
9. Page 13, line 31 -35.  It would be helpful to rephrase this sentence to make the direction of the 
relationship more explicit.  
 
10. Table 3: The authors have removed the children < 1 year (n=23) from the regression 
analyses.  However, it isn't clear why the sample size for the regression analyses is 91 not 92 
(115-23). 
 
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 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 wri tten English  
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 o r 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 dec lare 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 av ailable 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 agree to the open peer review policy of the journal