JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Association of urinary tract endometriosis with physical and mental health: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 19 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
despite good overall merit, I have some comments to improve the quality of the paper
- please revise english language throughout the paper (abstract line  33-34 for example)
- please define UTE, and in particular bladder and ureteral endometriosis (eg DOI  10.1093/
humrep/deu360;  10.1080/01443615.2017.1349083)
- can you add some details also on the type of surgery for UTE and related complications (eg
DOI doi: 10.1002/ijgo.14402)
-While PCS is significantly lower in UTE patients, the absence of significant differences in MCS
should be discussed in greater depth, especially given the reported psychological burden of UTE.
-The study attributes lower MCS to miscarriages and urologic abnormalities. However, other
potential factors (e.g., chronic pain, stigma) that may contribute to mental health outcomes are
not thoroughly explored.
-The focus on surgical patients limits the applicability of findings to the broader UTE population,
especially those opting for conservative treatments. This limitation warrants a more explicit
acknowledgment.
- please add other co-localizations and discuss on the potential impact of these sites on the study
outcome(eg doi 10.1002/ijgo.14089); otherwise comment on this drawback -The exclusion of
postoperative HQoL assessments is a missed opportunity. Longitudinal data could have added
valuable insights into the effects of surgical interventions.
Title: Association of urinary tract endometriosis with physical and mental health: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 04 Jan 2025
Reviewer:  Yigit Cakiroglu
Reviewer's report:
General comments:
The manuscript has aimed to investigate the QL in UTE patients and gives original information
about the topic. The authors have analyzed in total 326 women (92 women with UTE and 234
women with DIE) in between 2020 and 2023.
Abstract:
The abstract section reflects the summary of the whole MS.
Bakcground:
Information about endometriosis, UTE, DIE, related symptoms and effects on QL have been
given in the introduction section. Aim has been defined in this section.
Material and Methods
Study design and patient selection, data collection methods, main outcome measures, statistical
analysis have been defined in this section.
Results
The results have been reported in regards of patients with UTE and the control group.
Discussion
The discussion section states the importance and significance of the findings.
References:
The reference section contains appropriate and number of references.
Tables:
Tables are well-designed and well-organized.
Title: Association of urinary tract endometriosis with physical and mental health: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 04 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for diverting this nice article to me for peer reviewing
Honestly, I have googled Mental and Physical component scale system to understand them as I
have never come across them before and indeed found them easy to understand and implement.
The subdivision of the total sample into study group with urinary tract endometriosis and control
group with their statistical comparisons are all correct and can't be explained in clarity and detail
more than the author did in the paper. I agree with his results.
Yet, in table 5 the arrangement of coefficient as (Reference group) is some how confusing for
those with out enough knowledge in statistics.
Of course I understand the meaning of (beta) symbol listed in the table as the coefficient
associated with this variable. T value, 95% CI and p Value are all standard comparison
component understandable to me for any coefficient  in multiple linear regression.
However the word (Reference) here, has some point of view to be concerned about;
How much it is confusing to those who are not well acquainted with statistics? Maybe they
confuse the results with logistics regression?
However, I am not going to reject this point based on my single point of view. Maybe the point
of view of other colleagues peer reviewer matter more to explain this point.
In general , the author confirmed the aim of study through his methodology and I have no
problem in accepting this paper.
Thank you very much
Wisam Akram
Title: Association of urinary tract endometriosis with physical and mental health: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 05 Jan 2025
Reviewer:  Kamil Fram
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for asking me to review this nice topic. Many criticism points must be corrected,
clarified, or rephrased before it is approved for publication.
• The manuscript needs proper editing, grammar review, and punctuation.
• In the methods section, line 23, you cannot start any sentence with numbers.
• In the first table, line 92, the authors mentioned
Accompany with adenomyosis
Yes 41(44.67%) 114(48.72%) 0.305 0.581
No 51(55.43%) 120(51.28%)
Accompany with ovarian endometriosis
Yes 52(56.52%) 142(60.68%) 0.368 0.544
No 40(43.48%) 91(38.89%)
What is this table's benefit to the topic? It is well known that there is a strong relationship between
the sites and associated adenomyosis. I look forward to an explanation.
• The notes below the table should contain an explanation of the value of these stars. This note
was repeated in most of the tables.
0.005*
0.007*
• I am surprised to find that the incidence of ureteric stenting implantation and urologic
abnormalities is higher among the study group! We need an explanation for this phenomenon.
Compared to other studies, this point is essential.
• Nobody can claim he is the first person who writes on a certain topic. I do not like this statement
because you can find it if you search. The link below is about the quality of life for women with
endometriosis.
https://journals.viamedica.pl/ginekologia_polska/article/view/93995
Title: Association of urinary tract endometriosis with physical and mental health: a cross-
sectional study
Version: 3 Date: 17 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for diverting this manuscript to me for re reviewing again!
I really enjoyed reading the author reply. I remember very well that I didn't suspect the author
efforts or scientific approach,  rather I found it somehow confusing.
Yet, science is science. The author reply is highly comprehensive and satisfactory and I think
he is fully aware of what he did in his paper.
Accordingly; my decision; Accept!
Thank you very much
Wisam Akram
Title: Validation of the Menopause Representation Questionnaire (MenoSentations- Q) among
Iranian Women and Cross-Cultural Comparison with Portuguese Women
Version: 1 Date: 08 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Leventhal's illness perception model is well used in health psychology, and has been applied to
menopause. This paper reports on the psychometric validation of an Iranian adaptation of the
measure, which adds to the research and enables a useful measure to be offered in Iran. The
main body of the study is well conducted ; the paper could be improved by some relatively
minor changes:
Introduction paragraph 2 - "Menopausal women experience various sexual and psychosocial (7),
and physiological changes such as hot flashes, insomnia, weight gain, bloating, mood swings,
menstrual irregularity, breast discomfort, depression, and headaches(3), which can affect their
daily lives. These changes make women vulnerable to both physical and psychological clinical
conditions (8)" These sentences suggest that most or all menopausal women experience these
symptoms and reduced quality of life.
Introduction third page second paragraph - the terms menopause representations  and
'menopause manifestations' should be clearly defined.  Belief and cognitive representations of
menopause are different from presence or severity of symptoms.
The following description of the measures is suggested as being  clearer: "The Menopause
Representations Questionnaire MRQ was developed by Hunter & O'Dea and translated, adapted
and validated for a Portuguese population and called the MRQ MenoSensations-Q. "
Study Design and Participants
The two samples - Portuguese and Iranian differ in that one is a clinic sample the other a
community sample.  The problems that this could raise need to be discussed e.g. the clinic sample
being more likely to report problematic symptoms in Identity and negative consequences.  This
difference was apparent in the results.
It would be helpful to emphasize which samples were use din which analyses.
The Discussion could be edited to have more focus on the current findings [e.g. the impact of
the sampling should be discussed] and how they relate to previous research.
For example the original MRQ subscales very much mirror those found in the factor analyses
in this study. The original MRQ  has also been used to  evaluate psychological interventions
[e.g. Hardy et al Self-help cognitive behavior therapy for working women with problematic
hot flushes and night sweats (MENOS@Work): a multicenter randomized controlled trial,
Menopause 25 2018] and to investigate menopause representations in a range of countries for
example India and UAE [Stefanopoulou et al IMS study of Climate, Altitude, Temperature
and vasomotor symptoms in the United Arab Emirates, CLIMACTERIC 2014;17:425–
432; Stefanopoulou et al, An International Menopause Society study of climate, altitude,
temperature (IMS-CAT) and vasomotor symptoms in urban Indian regions, Climacteric 2014
Aug;17(4):417-24.]
Typos - full stops are missing in several sections.
Title: Validation of the Menopause Representation Questionnaire (MenoSentations- Q) among
Iranian Women and Cross-Cultural Comparison with Portuguese Women
Version: 3 Date: 06 Feb 2025
Reviewer:  Héctor González-de la Torre
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors:
Thank you for allowing me to review this manuscript again. I can see that most of the requested
changes have been implemented. I thank the authors for their efforts. Therefore from my point
of view it can be published. I encourage you to do more updated approaches to factor analysis
in future studies. Best regards
Title: NTRK rearranged spindle cell neoplasm of the uterine cervix: a rare case report and
literature review
Version: 2 Date: 19 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This case report is worth reporting as it is one of the future accumulations for fusion gene-related
sarcomas. However, several typos and amendments are required.
#1 The description of histological findings before IHC findings is crucial. Please add the
description.
#2 In L88, melon-A may be melan A.
#3 IHC findings may be more informative when combined with in-house IHC and additional
IHC at the consultation institute.
#4 In lines 150-154, what stands for "mild heterozygosity"? From the context, it seems nuclear
atypia. Nuclear division is usually phrased as "mitosis" in the pathological description.
#5 In 159 keratins (SMA, desmin, caldesmon), they are not correct. They are smooth muscle
markers.
#6 In line 232, prognosis factors should be prognostic factors
#7 In line 233, "is still warranted," please clarify this phrase. It seems "not warranted yet" or
something.
Title: NTRK rearranged spindle cell neoplasm of the uterine cervix: a rare case report and
literature review
Version: 2 Date: 14 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
RELEVANCE - Does this case report make a contribution to medical knowledge, have
educational value, or highlight the need for a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognostic
approaches?
Yes, this report contributes to medical knowledge
CASE DESCRIPTION - Are the details of the case sufficiently well described to understand the
patient's symptoms and course of treatment?
Yes, the description of the case is sufficient
DIAGNOSIS/INTERPRETATION - Based on the facts presented, are the diagnosis,
interpretation, and course of treatment medically sound?
No, based on information contained in the report, the authors’ interpretation of this case is
unsound
DISCUSSION OF THE CASE - Does the discussion appropriately analyse the importance of the
findings and their relevance to future understanding of disease processes, diagnosis or treatment?
Has an adequate literature review pertinent to the case been included?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Could an appropriately REVISED version of this
work represent a technically sound contribution?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is a well executed written case report of NTRK rearranged
spindle cell neoplasm arising in uterine cervix.  Clinical history as well as histopathology and
molecular biological features of the patient were also well described. This reviewer has the
following comments; (1)  For the completeness, histopathological findings of uterine cervix and
endometrium should be included.  (2) Macroscopic features  of resected tumor could provide
important information and the authors should include this, especially its cut surface in the
revision. (3) The authors stated that NGS analysis is the gold standard of NTRK rearranged
spindle cell neoplasm. This statement may be true in the institutions where NGS analysis is
readily available but in our experience, FISH and PCR based analysis are sufficient to reach the
diagnosis. The authors may need to further discuss this in terms of routine clinical practice.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
As stated above.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
None"
Title: NTRK rearranged spindle cell neoplasm of the uterine cervix: a rare case report and
literature review
Version: 4 Date: 18 Dec 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 responded to the comments of this reviewer in the
satisfactory fashion.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
none
Title: Association between overactive bladder and female sexual frequency: a cross-sectional
analysis of the National Health and nutrition examination survey data
Version: 0 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Overall this is a worthwhile study and uses a big data set to look and an under researched topic.
The statistical analysis appears sound.  I have an issue with the use of the term Female Sexual
Dysfunction, FSD, as the group have only used sexual frequency in their analysis and have
extrapolated this to cover the whole of the FSD.  They reference 1 paper where the team have
used frequency as a maker of FSD, but even in that paper ( ref 26) they have  have been clear in
the title to say ' Female sexual dysfunction as measured by low sexual frequency.  The definition
and a reference for FSD needs to be incorporated into the introduction.
Ref 3 in introduction is on mice and is referencing human behavioural data- to be changed.
Methods- definition of FSD, ref 26 - is this an official definition? ref 26 is a research paper, Is
there not an official definition?
Title: Association between overactive bladder and female sexual frequency: a cross-sectional
analysis of the National Health and nutrition examination survey data
Version: 0 Date: 13 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I like the idea of this paper very much, I feel it is very overdue.  However it has not been done
to date because it is very difficult to qualify female sexual dysfunction.  I do not completely
agree with using sexual frequency of vaginal or anal sex as a definition or proxy for female
sexual dysfunction.   female sexual dysfunction is very multifactorial,  which is why large scale
questionnaires such as NHANES  are difficult to define this, without teasing out the reason for
the sexual dysfunction.  I would advocate for changing the title of the paper to "association
between overactive bladder and female  sexual frequency: a cross-sectional analysis of the
National Health and nutrition examination survey data"  to better reflect what was examined
in the data
Title: Prevalence and factors associated with post-abortion contraceptive uptake at Mbagala
Hospital, Temeke, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Version: 3 Date: 01 Jun 2024
Reviewer:  Zahida Qureshi
Reviewer's report:
In addition to the comments made on the attached review word document suggest that the authors
consider including the following two references
SAGE Open Med. 2022; 10: 20503121221105589.
Published online 2022 Jun 26. doi: 10.1177/20503121221105589
PMCID: PMC9244931
PMID: 35784667
Interpregnancy interval after a miscarriage and obstetric outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy
in a low-income setting, Nigeria: A cohort study
Lucky Osaheni Lawani,1,2 Joseph Tochukwu Enebe,3 Paul Eze,4 Francis Nwabueze
Igboke,2Chukwuemeka Ikeji Ukaegbe,2 Monica Omosivie Ugwu,5 Ujunwa Justina
Agu,6Enebe Nympha Onyinye,7 and  Chukwuemeka Anthony Iyoke5
Level and determinants of contraceptive uptake among women attending facilities with abortion-
related complications in East and Southern Africa
Zahida Qureshi, Alanna Jamner, Veronique Filippi, George Gwako, Alfred Osoti, Hedieh
Mehrtash, Adama Baguiya, Folasade Adenike Bello, Rachidatou Compaoré, Luis Gadama …
See all authors
First published: 22 October 2021
https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13898
Title: Prevalence and factors associated with post-abortion contraceptive uptake at Mbagala
Hospital, Temeke, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Version: 4 Date: 03 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
I commend you for doing a good work with the revision.  However,  you did not respond to the
following important comments I made  in the methodology/results segments;
1. How the data from the open-ended questions was analysed
2. How your participants' knowledge of Family Planning was assessed, which appeared in Table
1 but was not mentioned in the Methodology. This is important for reproducibility.
3. The methodology for assessing your participants' knowledge of the chosen FP method is not
documented. This is also very important for reproducibility.
Title: Prevalence and factors associated with post-abortion contraceptive uptake at Mbagala
Hospital, Temeke, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Version: 5 Date: 15 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
1. Although the authors provided the information on how the open-ended question(s) were
analysed and how the knowledge of FP of the participants was assessed,  it was/were not reflected
or documented in the methodology section of the revised manuscript as claimed by the authors.
The explanations were only provided in their response to the reviewers.  In addition, asking the
participants to mention the FP methods they know cannot be said to be an open-ended question
in my opinion.
2. The educational level of the participants in Table 2(page 12) was captured twice with different
figures. This should be corrected.
Title: Prevalence and factors associated with post-abortion contraceptive uptake at Mbagala
Hospital, Temeke, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Version: 5 Date: 18 Oct 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?
No - there are major issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Not sure - key details are missing from the manuscript
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?
No - there are minor issues
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?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is a revised version of a manuscript to assess factors associated
with uptake of contraception among females with a prior abortion. While the authors have
described in the response letter how they addressed the critiques, the majority of this has not
made it into the manuscript and therefore the manuscript remains unacceptable
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The authors have addressed some grammatical issues and points of clarification in the
manuscript but the response letter contains more detail than the actual manuscript. There is a
consistent overuse of the term "modern" prior to the term contraception and it is distracting and
often makes for awkward sentences, could you not just say contraception? A disconnect remains
between the description of this being an interview and then reporting the data quantitatively.
Perhaps the authors can reframe their description of the process as a structured interview or
just that instead of giving the patients a survey to fill out on their own, they verbally gave
them the survey. The knowledge question concept is still puzzling  - are there any citations that
would show this is a valid method for determining knowledge - typically one question alone
is insufficient. As the variable are described, there is no listing of knowledge as a variable?
Counseling is shown in the table 1 but not described in the methods. The discussion could be
richer, one wonders also if there is stigma associated with abortion and if the gender of the person
conducting the interview (if it were a male) could have impacted the responses? Are there any
religious restrictions related to the use of contraception? or willingness to participate - these are
just general ideas - With regard to the conclusion, how does this information from your study
help improve or create reminders for clinicians to offer counsel?