Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Motivations to use hormonal contraceptive methods and condoms among
HIV-positive and negative women randomized to a progestin contraceptive in
Malawi: A qualitative study
Version: 
0 
Date: 
03 May 2020
Reviewer: 
Ramesh Adhikari
Reviewer's report:
Title of paper: Motivations to use hormonal contraceptive methods and condoms
among HIV-positive and negative women randomized to a progestin
contraceptive in Malawi: A qualitative study
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting study on family planning issue. The basic design and result
of the study is clear and appropriate. However, there are few issues that should
be made clear and addressed to improve the paper.
Abstract
1. Methods: Better to mention the number of FGDs in method section. How
many participants in one FGD?
2. Result: Better to keep number of IDIs and FGDs in Method section rather than
in result section.
Background
3. Author started the first sentence with old data (i.e 2015). This can be updated
with recent data. Other references can be updated with recent. 
Methods
4. Authors mentioned that they had 41 participants. They also conducted 30 In-
depth interviews and 6 FGDs. What is the size of FGDs? Need to explain why
they included same participants in both IDI and FGDs?
5. How many data analysts were involved in coding of the data? Did they check
Inter coder reliability (ICR)? Better to mention these information.
6. It will be good if authors mention whether they coded deductive or inductive?
Did they find new theme? 
7. Mention how many themes or sub themes they developed during analysis.
Result:
9. Author can make a table and present socio-demographic characteristics of 41
participants even it is from qualitative study. 
10. Better to keep number in parenthesis (n= ...) in main result while referring
the number of participants as most participants, more participants, almost all etc.
Discussion
11. Author need to discuss the key findings with the findings of the research
conducted in similar setting and using similar methods.
12. There is no limitation in the manuscript. Author need to write the limitation
of the study.
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 written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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 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 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 declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 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
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial
office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note
you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and
confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we
will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please publish my name with my
report.