JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: laparoscopic vs. abdominal radical
trachelectomy
Version: 4 Date: 06 May 2022
Reviewer:  Federica Tomao
Reviewer's report:
In the last years the scientific interest in fertility preservation strategies has been increasing,
and the number of published studies on this topic has grown significantly. In this context the
development of strategies for fertility preservation represent one of the most important goals for
gynecologic oncology care. Therefore this paper deserves full consideration  and careful  critical
discussion . Certainly  this study  presents  evident  limitations  and critical points due to   its
retrospective nature, the small number of patients  and the lack of randomization procedure.
Furthermore   the authors, with such a small number of patients, claimed to have too many
objectives, such as evaluation of reproductive outcomes  in recruited patients too. However the
manuscript is very interesting , sufficiently well written and detailed,  clear and full of interesting
issues. The introduction is well balanced but  perhaps too concise . I suggest to more detail
the quality of diagnostic procedures aimed to select  the patients who  should be treated with a
fertility sparing approach. Moreover,  more informations  about the role of conization  should
be discussed in the introduction.I suggest  also to include in the conclusion section how clinical
studies should be designed in the future , in order to  evaluate  the role of fertility sparing
techniques in young patients with cervical cancer. Some comments about the potential role of
neoadjuvant chemotherapy  before the use of a fertility sparing approach should be appropriate.
Finally , I suggest to include in the bibliographic list the following  papers, in order to improve
the quality of manuscript:
1) Tomao F, Maruccio M, Preti EP, Boveri S, Ricciardi E, Zanagnolo V, Landoni F.
Conization in Early Stage Cervical Cancer: Pattern of Recurrence in a 10-Year Single-
Institution Experience.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017 Jun;27(5):1001-1008. doi: 10.1097/
IGC.0000000000000991.
2)Tomao F, Corrado G, Peccatori FA, Boveri S, Preti EP, Colombo N, Landoni F. Fertility-
Sparing Options in Young Women with Cervical Cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2016
Jan;17(1):5. doi: 10.1007/s11864-015-0386-9.
3) Ph M, Maulard A, Scherier S, Sanson C, Zarokian J, Zaccarini F, Espenel S, Pautier P, Leary
A, Genestie C, Chargari C, Grynberg M, Gouy S.Oncologic results of fertility sparing surgery of
cervical cancer: An updated systematic review.Gynecol Oncol. 2022 Apr;165(1):169-183. doi:
10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.01.023.
4)Viveros-Carreño D, Rodriguez J, Rendon Pereira GJ, Slama J, Halaska MJ, Robova H, Pareja
R.Fertility-sparing surgery after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in women with cervical cancer
larger than 4 cm: a systematic review.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2022 Apr 4;32(4):486-493. doi:
10.1136/ijgc-2021-003297.
Title: Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: laparoscopic vs. abdominal radical
trachelectomy
Version: 7 Date: 09 Jun 2022
Reviewer:  Federica Tomao
Reviewer's report:
I have appreciated  the manuscript  resubmission with the corrections and suggestions indicated
in the first version .
Therefore , my current comment is positive and I have none other requests.
Title: Optimization of a protocol for the evaluation of antibody responses to human
papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in low-resource settings
Version: 1 Date: 07 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
Monitoring antibody levels in HPV vaccinated and unvaccinated girls is important, but it is not
clear to me what the purpose of this study is. It seems that this study has two purposes: assay
validation and epidemiological comparison of vaccinated and unvaccinated girls.
For assay validation, the control population seems too old. I guess that many girls in
the unvaccinated group have been infected leading to the development of antibodies.  For
instance, HPV16 antibody levels are above the threshold also in unvaccinated girls. For an
epidemiological comparison, sample sizes are very small and the research question is not
sufficiently interesting. It is well known that vaccination increases antibody levels. It might be
interesting to study whether antibody levels wane over time, but this information cannot be
retrieved from a cross-sectional assessment after 3 years.
Title: Optimization of a protocol for the evaluation of antibody responses to human
papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in low-resource settings
Version: 1 Date: 20 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
The study title describes investigating the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent vaccines in a
select group of girls and young women.  Your aims state you want to optimise the assay -
is it the assay itself that you've optimised or is it the vaccination protocol after knowing the
immunogenicity?
Methods: please clarify why 1U/ml was used as the threshold for positive/negative. Has this
been used/validated in previous studies?
What is the over arching  aim and benefit of such a study? how will it help to know how long
the antibodies last for?
How does this study compare to other similar studies? How is it any different?
There are some minor typing errors - line 128 'final dose' is duplicated. Line 139 'accent' should
be assent/consent. Line 358 'vaccinees'
Title: Knowledge and practice of cervical cancer prevention and associated factors among
commercial sex workers in Shashemene town, west Arsi, Oromia region, Ethiopia:
Version: 4 Date: 26 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
1. Please add "why is commercial sex worker group  important to investigate" in introduction.
2. Please specify primary objective and revise sample size calculation.
3. Date of study conducted should be described. June 01, 2020?
4. Why did this study include only commercial sex workers women who registered at family
guidance association clinic? This point may be selection bias. This group of participant cannot
represent  commercial sex worker women living in Shashemene town.
5. Please explain how to use a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire in this study.
meeting, personal/telephone interview, or fill-out questionaire?
6. What is the cut-off point of good knowledge? criteria should be defined in methodology part.
7. From Ethiopia practiced cervical cancer screening between 30-49 years of age at least every
three years based on WHO recommendation. This study included  223 women had age less than
30 year so participant in this group must have no history of screening.
8. Table 7 should be revised in age of participants rows.
Title: Knowledge and practice of cervical cancer prevention and associated factors among
commercial sex workers in Shashemene town, west Arsi, Oromia region, Ethiopia:
Version: 4 Date: 27 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
Comment
Title: The manuscript did not mention the practice of cervical cancer prevention
It might be better to change to
Knowledge and  of practice of cervical cancer prevention and…..
Abstract:
Background: For a medical journal, I think the background is not necessary
Methods: Not clear about “the practice of cancer prevention” The practice of whom?
Please specify the methods for having the data. (questionnaire/ interview ….)
Background:
For a medical journal, the 1st paragraph is not necessary
The 5th line: The peak time of infected HPV is NOT after menopause. (The peak time is young
age with sexually active)
The 3rd paragraph: Line 4,5: not clear
Method
Not clear about the studied time
Interviewed by whom??
How many spending times for each interview?
Please specify briefly about 24 knowledge-related questions or other questionnaires that using
in this research
What was the definition of good and poor knowledge?
Does the knowledge of cervical cancer prevention is including the HPV vaccine?
Results & Table
Table 1 the unit of monthly income
Table2 no need to specify the place of study
Please specify all abbreviations used in the table in the footnote
Table 7:
What was the meaning of age of the participant, number of sexual partners, Yes and NO ????/
level of knowledge poor mean? / good mean?
Title: Knowledge and practice of cervical cancer prevention and associated factors among
commercial sex workers in Shashemene town, west Arsi, Oromia region, Ethiopia:
Version: 8 Date: 23 May 2022
Reviewer:  Rene H. M. Verheijen
Reviewer's report:
I reviewed the revised manuscript. The authors clearly put an effort to adequately respond to
the comments and suggestions of myself, as well as of my 2 co-reviewers. As a result, the paper
has been significantly improved, however it would still need EDITORIAL SUPPORT before
publication.
Although there are quite some limitations and biased, now well addressed in the discussion
section of this paper, PUBLICATION WOULD BE WARRANTED  in view of the importance
of the subject, not only for Ethiopia but for any developing country. The suggestion made in the
revised manuscript that comparison with other studies would be impossible because of lack of
similar studies in professional sex workers is, however and therefor, highly contestable.
Title: Barriers and Facilitators to Attending and Being Physically Active during Recreation
Time among Women Incarcerated
Version: 3 Date: 07 Jun 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for once again offering me the opportunity to review this paper. I think you present
a much stronger argument for the need to conduct research in jail by contrasting what has been
previously studied and what yet remains neglected by research. The methods applied, especially
the instrument development and the survey instrument itself, are much more transparent to the
reader. The amendments also make it clear how the qualitative responses were analyzed.
I would have very much liked to see “Additional File 2” and “Additional File 3” which you
mention, but which appears not to have been included among the files submitted for review.
These should contain inferential statistical analyses which would have been interesting to
review. Unfortunately, it is not possible to judge the quality of the statistical analyses if they
are not directly reported in the paper and the materials are not available. When reporting
associations, the test statistics are usually reported, even if they are non-significant. I would
have liked to see them in the paper. In your response you also mention “Additional Material 1”
and “Additional Material 2”, which I could not find. I do not know if these are the same as the
aforementioned “Additional Files” 1 and 2.
I would like to ask the following to be reviewed:
- Please review this sentence (p. 3). The second part appears incomplete or has a grammatical
error: In addition to overweight/obesity, women incarcerated at CCDF reported fair or poor
general health (45%), an indicator for subsequent mortality other poor health outcomes (7-9).
- Please review this sentence (p. 3). There appears to be a grammatical error. A single bout
of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity improves anxiety and depression symptoms (11, 15),
decreases blood pressure (11, 16), and improves sleep (11, 17) on the day it is performed and
improve when an individual engages in regular physical activity (11).
Otherwise, I feel that the present revision addresses my previous concerns well and I commend
you for your well-argued and informative paper.
Title: Women’s sexual autonomy as a determinant of cervical cancer screening uptake in Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia: A case-control study
Version: 3 Date: 28 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
Authors found that women’s own sexual autonomy was associated with the improvement of
cervical cancer screening uptake. I think it is worth to publish in BMC Women’s Health.
However, several issues need to be clarified before final acceptance.
#The national cervical cancer screening in Ethiopia should be described more, such as frequency
and the age of the first invitation.
#The reasons why the participants came to the institution originally should be written in each
group although the authors only described ‘ other service’.
#The definition of the level of sexual autonomy is not clear. Describe how the authors decide
low and high level from five questions.
#Is there data about the level of sexual autonomy in Ethiopia?
#Line 19, ‘Tele’ should be Telephone or Tel
Title: Women’s sexual autonomy as a determinant of cervical cancer screening uptake in Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia: A case-control study
Version: 5 Date: 01 Jun 2022
Reviewer:  Breanne Lott
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of the previous reviewer comments. I agree with
you that the paper has only been strengthened through the review process. I especially appreciate
the introduction of Table 2 with the questionnaire response frequencies.
Title: Women’s attitudes toward certification logos, labels, and advertisements for organic
disposable sanitary pads: Results from a multi-city cross-sectional survey
Version: 0 Date: 11 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
need to write a good test related to the reliability and validity of the tool. this (The Cronbach’s
alpha value of the questionnaire was 0.857.)  is not enough at all. and explain you reference.
how did you build the questionnaire ?
What is the study hypothesis?
how do you recruit online participants?? this is not right at all.
the participation, in this case, is based on the probability sample method.
your sample is large! why it is not normal?? something is wrong in the data.
I can't know the score of the attitude. is it good?? or bad? or what is the difference in attitude
between the groups.? I think if u find a score and compare the score by t-test or make a cut
point is better.
Title: Women’s attitudes toward certification logos, labels, and advertisements for organic
disposable sanitary pads: Results from a multi-city cross-sectional survey
Version: 0 Date: 21 Feb 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
It is an interesting topic. Also, it is an important issue.
I have some comments.
Abstract
Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the abstract. "cross-sectional"
Method
Present key elements of study design early in the paper.
Describe the setting, locations
Give the sources and methods of selection of participants.
"Participants were recruited from a large online panel managed by a market research company
responsible for data collection. " Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias.
You should give more information about your questionnaire language.
Discussion
Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study results.
It would be best if you used the STROBE and CHERRIES guidelines for reporting
https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/
Title: TITLE: A Comparison of Behavioural Models explaining Cervical Cancer Screening
Uptake
Version: 2 Date: 09 Feb 2022
Reviewer:  Pooyan Afzali Harsini
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript discusses Cervical cancer screening that is important among women. In this
paper three important health education theory has been discussed which is very interesting.
BACKGROUND: To make more updates on your work, it suggested giving more reports that
prove  Cervical cancer has important roles in the health economy especially in China. for
example, this article might be useful :
https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-021-02051-z
It would better use the below article after reference 10 to add some details about eliminating
strategies of Cervical cancer :
https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-021-01930-9
Discussion: it's better to reduce this section and remove repeated sentences and focus on your
finding.
Title: Pattern of contraceptive use among reproductive-aged women with diabetes and/or
hypertension: Findings from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey
Version: 1 Date: 16 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
The present paper has no scientific conceptualization in the terms of filling the gap in the
literature. The introduction is very poorly written and also relevant literature or study is being
cited. No conceptual framework was added to the manuscript. I am really not able to digest the
fact that how can diabetes and hypertension can be associated with contraceptive usage. The
discussion is also not in the line with the paper analysis.
Title: Pattern of contraceptive use among reproductive-aged women with diabetes and/or
hypertension: Findings from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey
Version: 1 Date: 20 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
An intriguing study in public health research is " Association between contraception use,
diabetes and hypertension: Findings from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey." It
would be much appreciated if the authors could update the following information, which would
improve the paper's quality:
Title
It would be highly appreciated if the authors mentioned the study participants (reproductive-
aged women).
Abstract
The background mentioned “diabetes and/or hypertension and contraception,” whereas the title
mentioned “and.” Please make it clear.
What is meant by traditional and modern contraceptive methods? Can you please explain those
here?
Introduction
The problem statement is evident in this section, based on the global context. It would be better
if the authors added some more references to the Bangladesh context.
Methods
Study design
Why did the authors mention male participants in this dataset on their last two lines? Is there
any justification for that?
Discussion
Can you please add some stigma related to this issue here? “this is quite challenging in LMICs,
…low prevalence of contraceptive use, financial difficulties, and stigma and misconception
associated with pregnancies ….”. There are several stigmas around this; which stigma are you
indicating?
What could be the possible alternative of using cross-sectional data and self-reported data?
Ethics approval and consent to participate
“Informed consent was obtained from all participants”: if not mistaken, is it collected by the
DHS.
“We obtained permission to access this survey and conduct this research.” From where has this
permission been collected?
Overall, the study conveys an interesting finding.
All the very best! Thanks.
Title: Pattern of contraceptive use among reproductive-aged women with diabetes and/or
hypertension: Findings from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey
Version: 2 Date: 13 May 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for the corrections.  It would be appreciated if you can clarify further about the
"misunderstanding". Also, rethink about using the terminology "stigma" which is more
appropriate. The authors need to decide which stigma will be more appropriate here.
On page 17:  Authors talk about some misconceptions, but they are on literature (43 and 17).
They need to clarify specific misconceptions from the participants first (as they mention about
having misconceptions) and then mention other evidence.
Other than that, it is good. Best of luck.
Title: Pattern of contraceptive use among reproductive-aged women with diabetes and/or
hypertension: Findings from Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey
Version: 4 Date: 07 Jun 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for responding to the comments. There are a few grammatical errors in the references.
Please correct all of them (i.e., Diabetes care; should it be Diabetes Care).
Thank you once again, and best wishes.
Title: Patients’ and relatives’ perspectives on best possible care in the context of developing a
multidisciplinary center for endometriosis and adenomyosis: Findings from a national survey
Version: 2 Date: 17 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript tries to establish the care for multidisciplinary center for endometriosis and
adenomyosis in Norway. It is suitable for publication, only some minor revisions are needed.
1. some abbreviation such as "MO" in line 139, which is not easy to recognize this is the name
of author.
2. The authors used questionnaire based on ENDOCARE QUESTIONNAIRE (ECQ) for temple,
which is used  to  improve  the  Patient-centeredness of endometriosis care. The ECQ generates
three outcomes:   Mean Importance Scores;  Percentages of Negative Performance; and  Patient-
centeredness  scores.  In this paper, the authors seem do not show the qualitative data of the
questionnaire results.
Title: Safety and efficacy of ninjin’yoeito along with iron supplementation therapy for
preoperative anemia, fatigue, and anxiety in patients with gynecological disease: an open-label,
single-center, randomized phase-II trial
Version: 2 Date: 08 Mar 2022
Reviewer:  Ahmed M. Maged
Reviewer's report:
Interesting study. Some issues need to be clarified
1. Safety should be added before efficacy in the title
2. It should be clarified that iron suppl is used in both groups
3. What is the rationale or reference for the dose and duration of the drug
4. What were the causes of anemia in the participants
5. The authors should describe the food and nutritional status of the participants and their families
and food intake during the treatment duration
6. What were the indications for surgery
7. Length of operations and its counseling as it will affect anxiety assessment
8. Sample size calculation is laking
9. Most seriously is the occurrence of liver dysfunction in 1 out of 15 (very high incidence)
Title: Improving Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postpartum
Depression Awareness Among Social Support Networks During Covid-19 Pandemic in
Malaysia
Version: 3 Date: 10 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
The study is very valuable and contributes to the field. Its scope can be improved by making
validity and reliability in different languages. I have a few revision suggestions:
-Data collection written twice, one must be deleted.
-Limited aspects of the study have been written. But its strengths are not written. Strengths
should be highlighted (in the last paragraph of the introduction).
-What are the research questions or hypotheses? It should be added to the method section.
-How was the sample calculation done? Has G*power analysis been used? An appropriate
sampling method should be used.
How was the participant selection made? Was the survey randomly sent to people?
-Participant flow chart should be added. How many people were reached? How many people
quit working? How many people were excluded from the analysis?
How can we integrate the results of this study into daily life? What positive aspects will it have in
terms of PPD? What are the recommendations and goals? These questions should be explained
in detail.
I think these revisions will strengthen the article.
Sincerely,
Title: Improving Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postpartum
Depression Awareness Among Social Support Networks During Covid-19 Pandemic in
Malaysia
Version: 5 Date: 13 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
“Results of GLMM analysis showed that educational levels were a significant predictor of a good
understanding of PPD”. However under Table 8, the p-value is 0.167 which was not significant.
Conclusion: “public awareness of PPD had a substantial impact on participants' attitudes and
knowledge about the disease”. I am not sure whether this statement was based on the author’s
assumption, or based on the study findings. Although there might be a correlation between these
variables, causal temporal relationship was not established, hence it is not accurate to say public
awareness has impact on attitude and knowledge.