JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 1 Date: 27 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
As my background is in WFC, I really enjoy the topic of this paper and I agree that it is an area
that needs further investigation. However, this manuscript has several things that concern me:
1. The blinded manuscript has the authors' names and institutions.
2.  Some specific terms need to be explained, such as under the introduction section:  what is
'14th Five-Year Plan period'? What is "She era"? etc.
3. No fertility attitude is mentioned in the Introduction but later it is used as a mediator.
5. Please provide the P-value instead of using ***.
6. Please provide a table of mean and standard deviations of the variables.
4. What concerns me the most is the sample. What are the recruitment requirements? When
we are investigating the relationships between WFC, fertility intention, fertility attitude, and
Child-Rearing Burden, it is important for the readers to have more information about the
participants. While the manuscript has provided some information regarding the participants,
the most important details are missing. For example, are they all married? How many children
do they have on average(this will significantly influence and make a difference to the fertility
intention and attitude)? What are the ages of the children? Do they all have children? If not, how
did you measure the Child-Rearing Burden? etc.
Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 2 Date: 27 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
I appreciate the authors’ careful consideration of the reviewers’ comments and concerns, as well
as their efforts to address the previous round of reviews. I believe the manuscript has improved
significantly. However, there are some key points that I hope the authors can further consider:
1. The authors argue that fertility intentions refer to an ideal state not constrained by current
circumstances. However, according to Miller, Severy, and Pasta (2004, p.194), fertility desires
measure what one would like to do given no situational constraints, whereas fertility intentions
are what one actually plans to do given the reality within which one operates. Therefore, it may
not be accurate to use the term fertility intentions in this context, as intentions take into account
situational factors that may prevent someone from achieving their fertility desires. Instead, the
term fertility desires should be used. Throughout the discussion, the term fertility intentions
should be replaced with fertility desires, and fertility planning should be referred to as fertility
intentions.
2. The authors mentioned that the Fertility Intention Scale was modified to better align with the
themes of the study and language conventions. Could the authors provide the list of questions
in the appendix and specify the modifications made? This is important because it is the main
outcome variable and should thus be measured accurately.
3. I appreciate the inclusion of the four questions regarding women’s childrearing burden. Could
the authors clarify if, for women without children, the first three questions would be phrased as
“After having children, who *will* primarily…”?
4. It would also be helpful for the authors to include the explanation of how annual income data
were averaged and categorized into seven ascending segments (values 1 to 7) in the manuscript
itself. This will help readers understand how the indicator was created. Given the use of multiple
scaled items in this study, it might be helpful to include an appendix showing all the above
questions used to elicit responses from participants.
5. It is interesting that including controls such as the number of children and the sex of children
did not alter the results. Is it possible for the authors provide the coefficients, standard errors,
and p-values for these controls to better understand what is driving the model?
Thank you again for your detailed revisions.
Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 2 Date: 26 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research 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?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
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 the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have responded in details of the concerns of reviewers;
and have also revised the manuscript accordingly (yellow highlighted text). It met the best
practices.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
None
Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 4 Date: 06 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research 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?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
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 the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have done a thorough job of responding to the reviewers'
comments.
I would like to see a bit of discussion of whether this sample can be considered representative
- it seems relatively spread across the country, and those who answer such a survey may have
unusual fertility intentions.
I also don't entirely understand the comment about control variables.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
The authors say the control variables had no effect.  What does that mean?  Are the beta
coefficients the same?  Does it just mean it retains statistical significance?"
Title: The Impact of Work-family Conflict on Chinese Women’s Fertility Intention: The Role
of Fertility Attitude, Income Class, and Child-Rearing Burden
Version: 5 Date: 26 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research 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?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
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 the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have responded to the comments.  The response
to comment 2 doesn't entirely address the question, but at least provides some additional
information on the topic.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
The practical implications listed in the discussion section are interesting but are not tested or
demonstrated by the paper itself; they are more strategies that could be considered rather than
direct conclusions.
Title: Investigating the relationship between self-efficacy and quality of life in Iranian women
Version: 0 Date: 04 Mar 2024
Reviewer:  Khadijeh Khademi
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting topic in women’s health but the its writing style needs to be edited.
Methods
- Inclusion criteria are not enough.  What are the exclusion criteria? Did you include people with
mental retardation or physical disabilities in the study? Were the special conditions of health
like hypertension, diabetes and so on considered?
- Was the rationale for selecting “demographic information”?
- Please express cronbach’s alpha for each instrument in your study.
- How was the procedure of your study done?
Result
- Please report tables according APA style. These tables are difficult for reading.
Discussion
- Please Use logical and scientific reasons for any difference and alignment of the results of your
study with other studies.
- Please mention strength of your study. Please explain the solutions to reduce the limitations.
References
- Please use more references from the last 5 years.
Title: Narratives of Resilience: Understanding Iranian Breast Cancer Survivors through Health
Belief Model and Stress-Coping Theory for Enhanced Interventions
Version: 2 Date: 26 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Review Comments
Thank you for the opportunity to read your paper. However, I have some suggestions to enhance
the manuscript:
Introduction
1. To investigate the distinct experiences and coping strategies of breast cancer supervisors,
several theoretical frameworks have been employed. Please cite references. At least 2 references
that support this statement.
2. In Iran, where cultural norms and healthcare practices differ from Western contexts,
understanding how breast cancer survivors perceive their health and cope with stress is crucial
for developing effective interventions. Please give examples of how Iran differs from the West.
Methods
3. I have not seen an ethical approval related statement in the methodology, please add it.
4. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with 17 patients. Why choose 17 patients?
data saturation was reached until 17? Please tell detailed in this section.
Results
5. Although bolding, italics, etc. are used in the writing of the results to indicate the hierarchy
of sub-themes, this is still not clear enough, so please tabulate the themes and sub-themes.
Discussion
Implications for Intervention Advancement
I think the author wrote this part well, but there are still a few points that need refining:
6. The recommendations are those that are now widely recognized, and suggestions for future
interventions should be more specific and actionable.
7. It is recommended that the elaboration of recommendations for interventions in the specific
cultural context of Iran be expanded.
Title: Narratives of Resilience: Understanding Iranian Breast Cancer Survivors through Health
Belief Model and Stress-Coping Theory for Enhanced Interventions
Version: 3 Date: 12 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
1. Comment 1. To investigate the distinct experiences and coping strategies of breast cancer
supervisors, several theoretical frameworks have been employed. Please cite references. At least
2 references that support this statement. please highlight which Refs were added to cites.
2. NEW comment for results "Failure and Incorrect Diagnosis by General Practitioners". this
situation was frequently in Iran? If this is an isolated case, consider the need for a sub-theme.
3. NEW comment for Implications for Intervention Advancement: authors state: Addressing
financial and logistical barriers is also vital; implementing government-funded or NGO-
supported programs to subsidize treatment costs and establishing mobile clinics in rural areas
can alleviate financial burdens and improve access to necessary healthcare services.  Please
define the scope of nursing intervention. These may not be improved by nursing interventions.
Title: Examining Use of Telehealth in Jails: Linking Women to Community OUD Services
Version: 1 Date: 12 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Amelia Bailey
Reviewer's report:
This article provides rich detail about a telehealth intervention for women with opioid use
disorder during the post-release period (from Kentucky jails). Data presented came from client
participants as well as providers/staff involved with the intervention. The text is well written and
provides good detail for future implementers who might consider a similar intervention and/or
evaluation. I provide a few minor comments to enhance clarity.
Line 28-31: If possible, it would be great to have a brief understanding of what kind of data
were collected during the study period (including when) in the Abstract’s Methods, such as the
brief description provided 119-121.
Line 117: Is it possible to explain a bit more about the PreTreatment Telehealth protocol
– specifically, I am wondering, does this stage of the intervention (PreTreatment) inform a
secondary stage? (e.g., data used to inform a “Treatment” or “PostTreatment” component of the
intervention)
Line 153-155: Under the “General telehealth perceptions” section, as written it seems that the
Likert scale responses will not be included in this manuscript (per line 153-155). If true, is
there a reason why? For example, analysis of that data will be included in a manuscript about
intervention feasibility etc.?
There is a lot of rich detail in the methods section. Have the authors considered including a small
figure/graphic to demonstrate the timeline of the intervention? I think this could especially be
useful to explain when data from the distinct data sources were collected.
Although SUD was used e.g., line 376, I am not seeing it defined in the text.
Title: Effect of Educational Intervention based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) on
amount of Salt Intake in Pregnant Women with Prehypertension
Version: 2 Date: 02 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dears’ authors
1.  In the abstract “little information about cognitive affecting the salt consumption” Not related
to your research, so delete.
2. Key word based on Mesh?
3. Prevalence pre-eclampsia and subsequent eclampsia in Iran? Report in introduction.
4.  In the inclusion criteria write gestational age based on range of weeks.
5. Check of the normality was by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test or shapiro wilk test? Because, the
data is less than 100.
6. Which session/sessions was related to intention and which behavior? Report in the table.
7. In discussion section delete “Pregnancy not only affects the mother’s quality of life but also
causes the balanced and all-around growth of the child as well as his/her physical and mental
health in future. A key point is to closely attend to the mother’s nutritional status”, and you
report the most important results in the first paragraph.
Best regards
Title: Effect of Educational Intervention based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) on
amount of Salt Intake in Pregnant Women with Prehypertension
Version: 2 Date: 03 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
(http://www.biomedcentral.com/submissions/editorial-policies#standards+of+reporting),
please ensure your manuscript reporting adheres to PRISMA guidelines (http://www.prisma-
statement.org/) for reporting systematic reviews so your methodology can be fully evaluated and
utilised.  Please include a completed PRISMA checklist (including page numbers in the relevant
section) as an additional file when submitting your revised manuscript.
Title: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the recovery time of obstetric fistula in
Ethiopia, 2023
Version: 2 Date: 09 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Comments to authors
Title: I think it is better write the title as “Recovery time of obstetric fistula and its predictors
in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis”
Abstract:
# The introduction of this section is direct copy of the main introduction.
# Line 24 & 25: correct the grammar error
# 26&27 grammar error
# The authors mentioned that they used six databases to search articles but the included databases
were 5.
# Avoid abbreviations from this section.
# The authors stated “In retrospective cohort study design,” which studies design is it?
# “Our study is the most comprehensive study of the burden of obstetrics fistula to date.” This
is out of your study objectives.
# “Our findings suggest that the prevalence of fistula is lower…” This is also out of your study
objectives.
# The conclusion would include recommendation.
Introduction
The authors stated that
Some sentences and paragraphs lack consistency
“…only 15.5% of births attended by trained medical staffs. This must be out-dated information.”
According to the 2019 Ethiopia’s mini DHS, 50% of births were attended by skilled personnel.
Methods
The authors would clearly state PICO or PECO
“We excluded Studies that conducted on specific age group…”  Can you elaborate this?
Title: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the recovery time of obstetric fistula in
Ethiopia, 2023
Version: 2 Date: 13 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Predictors from Obstetric Fistula in Ethiopia, 2023. The objective of the review was to estimate
the pooled effect of time to recovery and predictors of obstetric fistula. However, the manuscript
had been written out of its aim. For instance: the authors did the pulled estimate of the proportion
but the aim of the study was pooled estimation of time to recovery and predictors.  Moreover, the
number of studies included in this review is six which is a very small number of studies. It is not
recommended to do a meta-analysis with this number of studies. Thus, this is very challenging
to accept this manuscript for publication.
The abstract section of the manuscript is poor. And important issues were not included. Better
to do further.
The authors should provide me with the list of articles which was searched from the Cochrane
Library.
Line 28:  The authors stated that Six databases; PubMed, Hinari, Epistemonikos, Cochrane
Library, and other search engines Google Scholar were searched. What is meant by other search
engines of Google Scholar? I need a list of specific databases.
The authors declare that they have used STATA version 16 for this systematic review and meta-
analysis. They need to explain how they were analyzed by STATA 16.
Authors should justify why they pooled proportion rather than time to recovery.
Authors need to justify the Searching method. when I search articles based on the provided key
terms (time to recovery ) AND (determinant* OR predictor* OR factor*) AND (obstetric fistula
OR vesicovaginal fistula OR rectovaginal fistula) AND (Ethiopia).  The number of articles found
in the databases is not correct. This is critical in the case of systematic review and meta-analysis.
All the findings should be reproducible.
Title: Barriers and facilitators for adherence to follow-up by HR-HPV-positive women with
premalignant cervical lesions: a mixed-design study in Mexico
Version: 2 Date: 06 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript titled “Barriers and facilitators for adherence to follow-up by HR-HPV-positive
women with premalignant cervical lesions: a mixed-design study in Mexico”, can be considered
interesting of good quality.
- I suggest correct few typos and a language revision.
- Authors should consider recent evidence about HPV-related lower genital tract lesion,
considering the potential role of ant-HPV vaccination and results of this study. I would be glad
if the authors discuss this important point, referring to PMID: 37978580
- HPV-lesions management is still a challenge in worldwide. I suggest reading and adding
recent evidence about the importance of adequate management and the state of the art of this
topic, with the aim to improve prognosis and the possibility of tailored management. I suggest
authors to read and insert in references the following article: “State of the art on HPV-related
cervical lesions, Tullio Golia D’Augè, Ilaria Cuccu, Andrea Etrusco, Antonio D’Amato, Antonio
Simone Laganà, Ottavia D’Oria, Giorgio Bogani, Violante Di Donato, Ludovico Muzii, Andrea
Giannini, doi: 10.36129/jog.2024.16. “
Considering these minor revisions and after the improving these points, the manuscript could
have the priority to be published.
Title: Barriers and facilitators for adherence to follow-up by HR-HPV-positive women with
premalignant cervical lesions: a mixed-design study in Mexico
Version: 3 Date: 10 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
The quality of the manuscript has improved thanks to the changes made. I think it could be of
interest to the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority to be published.