Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: The effect of a savings intervention on women's intimate partner violence victimization: 
Heterogeneous findings f rom a randomized controlled trial in Colombia  
 
Version: 1 Date: 08 May 2018  
 
Reviewer: Erin Stern  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This is a very interesting and relevant paper, and is well written.  I do have some suggestions and 
queries for clarification, which I trust would help strengthen the paper:  
 
Introduction  
In the part where you no te 'that theory predicts that control over resources may lead to improved 
treatment by their partner' I would encourage you to interrogate this more and to be careful that 
this does not  unintentionally put onus on women being empowered for receiving impro ved 
treatment from their spouses. It also affirms the importance to work with men to affect how they 
treat their spouses.  
'Because participants were poor': can you please clarify how that was defined?  
You also note that in the literature the effectiveness of interventions depends on characteristics of 
women and partners, can you please give examples and references here?  
It would also be very helpful to have a few background sentences on the context of Colombia, 
including the national extent of IPV, the stat e of economic empowerment for women, 
government policies or laws etc. It is important for the reader to be able to contextualize this 
study.  
 
Methods  
The methods appear to be very rigorous. Can you explain why you did not include emotional 
violence? This i s likely to have a significant impact on your study and research questions, and 
could be noted then as limitation for not having included it?  
Can you also unpack more how you measured and defined independent vs collaborative 
decision -making in relationshi ps? I think it is important to not consider collaborative decision -
making for women as necessarily unempowering, if it is equitable decision -making with their 
spouses, and it would be helpful if this distinction could be untangled more?  
It is interesting that the intervention had no effect on mental health. I think you could again note 
why it would have been valuable to measure emotional IPV, as there is more evidence of how 
emotional IPV significantly influences poor mental health. See for example this ma nuscript by 
Gibbs, Dunkle and Jewkes (2018)  
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194885   
In terms of the discussion section and results, I would emphasize another key findings is the 
importance to also work with men to prevent I PV and support women's economic empowerment. 
Do you also have any context specific recommendations for Columbia? Your conclusion is 
excellent  
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 t he 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 recommend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written 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 r eceived 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 com peting 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.  
 
No, 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 al ong 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 rep ort 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