JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Reviewer's report
Title:Efficacy of laparoscopic adenomyomectomy using double-flap method for
diffuse uterine adenomyosis
Version:3Date:23 December 2014
Reviewer: Ivo Meinhold-Heerlein
Reviewer's report:
The authors present a nicely written original article describing their technique of
double-flap adenomyomectomy for diffuse uterine adenomyosis. In addition, they
present their results of a randomized trial where 48 patients were treated via
conventional surgery (excision of adenomyosis) and 46 patients were treated via
double flap method. They conclude that the outcome (measured as decreased
menstrual blood amount, uterine volume, and CA 125 level, respectively) was
reduced in favor of the double flap method. The topic is interesting for the
readership since adenomyosis treatment in a fertility-conserving fashion is
increasingly seen as a necessity. However, there are several concerns that need
to be addressed by the authors before the manuscript can be considered for
publication (major compulsory revisions):
1. There are some actual literature citations to discuss:
Fertil Steril. 2014 Sep;102(3):802-807.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.05.028.
Epub 2014 Jun 19.
Who will benefit from uterus-sparing surgery in adenomyosis-associated
subfertility?
Kishi Y1, Yabuta M2, Taniguchi F2.
Reprod Biomed Online. 2014 Jun;28(6):753-60. doi:
10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.02.008. Epub 2014 Mar 4.
Treatment of adenomyomectomy in women with severe uterine adenomyosis
using a novel technique.
Saremi A1, Bahrami H2, Salehian P2, Hakak N3, Pooladi A4.
Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2014 Mar;57(2):128-35. doi: 10.5468/ogs.2014.57.2.128.
Epub 2014 Mar 15.
Laparoscopic assisted adenomyomectomy using double flap method.
Kim JK1, Shin CS1, Ko YB1, Nam SY1, Yim HS2, Lee KH1.
2. The description of the method needs more details.
3. The photographs need to be replaced. If the authors have operated on more
than 100 patients, they should be able to present high quality photographs. In
addition, The drawings should exactly be accompanied by a corresponding
photograph.
4. The authors need to tell more about the preoperative work-up and the
indication. How were the patients chosen? Via Ultrasound? Was a histology
needed before performing this type of operation?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Integration of HIV and Cervical cancer screening perceptions and
preferences of community in Uganda
Version:2Date:31 August 2014
Reviewer: Cyril Dim
Reviewer's report:
See attached document
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Integration of HIV and Cervical cancer screening perceptions and
preferences of community in Uganda
Version:2Date:30 December 2014
Reviewer: Renee Masching
Reviewer's report:
Overall Comments (specific comments in attached file):
This is a very interesting manuscript that highlights diverse viewpoints and
considerations when developing new programs. In a brief submission issues are
raised that consider community need, service delivery, program design and
policy. The specific attention to both men’s and women’s points of view is
respectful and demonstrates careful attention to community dynamics. The effort
to bring in urban, semi-urban and rural perspectives is greatly appreciated. It is
so important to consider and publish community perspectives in relation to
existing knowledge from clinic perspectives. In addition and with humility, the
issues raised are valuable for a reader who is unfamiliar with the context of
HIV/AIDS and CC screening in Uganda.
The research question and methods are clear, well defined and described in
enough detail to understand the rationale and approach undertaken in the
project. The literature provides context for the research focus and draws upon
other countries to highlight the potential and experience of integration. The
qualitative data is sound and the tables attached are helpful to visualize the
sample break down and data analysis.
The manuscript adheres to good standards for reporting. The limitations are
clear. The abstract and title are clearly linked to the article that follows. The
writing does reflect some limitations with English but the manuscript is concise,
easy to follow and an enjoyable read. References acknowledge and ground the
work in previously published literature and the research contributes a unique
perspective.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Forced Sex and Health Outcomes among Southern African Lesbian and
Bisexual Women: A cross-sectional study
Version:2Date:7 October 2014
Reviewer: Bianca Wilson
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions
The manuscript, “Forced Sex and Health Outcomes among Southern African
Lesbian and Bisexual Women: A cross-sectional study” addresses an important
topic. The rationale for it is clear, and the methodology fits well with study aims. I
offer a few comments to strengthen the final version.
1. When describing sex and gender, I encourage the authors to consider using
the term “sex assigned at birth”, rather than “biological sex” or “biological female”,
to signal the complex ways that sex is defined and to distinguish between how
people identify themselves as children and adults and how adults identified them
as children (i.e., assigned a gender or sex). I recognize there is debate about this
terminology, and the suggestion is based upon work in the U.S., so I offer this
merely as something to consider.
2. Lines 233-236: It is hard to follow whether the “X” is actually part of the item or
if respondents were asked to insert a community reference for the “X”. Please
revise.
3. Lines 395-399: It is not clear what the authors mean to suggest here. It
appears that the authors are arguing that the level of seriousness applied to
forced sex by women calls for a different frame of justice, but then in turn note
that a restorative frame may be appropriate in all cases. I would expand or delete
this section altogether, because it appears to be thrown in and not too well
thought out. If it is deleted, the discussion about distinctions between men and
women perpetrators could be expanded some, or explain why different predictors
were relevant depending on gender of “forcer”.
4. Authors should describe in text that they used the chi sq test of independence
to assess associations for tables 1 & 2.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:3Date:4 September 2014
Reviewer: Kuo-Chung Lan
Reviewer's report:
This randomized controlled trial conclude that rapid re-accumulation of
hydrosalpinx fluid is an obstacle against successful implantation and the cause of
lower success rate with ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid
compared with salpingectomy.
Major concern:
1. As introduction section told us the “salpingectomy or proximal tubal occlusion
requires hospitalization ,general anesthesia and may be associated with
operative complications particularly in patients with dense adhesions. Moreover,
bilateral salpingectomy precludes any possibility of future unassisted conception
or tubal repair’’ it mean remarkable difference existed between salpingectomy
and aspiration procedure. Even the study was open labeled due to the surgical
nature of treatment and then randomized into two groups.
My question is how to counsel about the benefits and risks of both
management from patients with justice and fair before randomization( line 102) ?
(only 12 patients refused to participate in the study on line 174) The
related statement is roughly and confused in this manuscript..
2. The result is reasonable, Admittedly, the sample size is small. However, the
long discussion section described seems like point to point record about literature
review. It seems lack of creative information for reader based on this trial result .
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:3Date:10 September 2014
Reviewer: hakan yarali
Reviewer's report:
There are several limitations including;
1. The major limitation of the current RCT is the limited sample size, as the
authors declare.
2. In order to opt the strategy of ultrasonographic aspiration, there should be
predictive factors whether fluid re-accumulation would occur or not. It may not be
acceptable for a patient to undergo COH and cryo-all strategy when fluid
re-accumulation occurs. In the current study, there appears to be no predictive
factor for a patient whether fluid re-accumulation would occur or not.
3. Lines 113-4, is not concise.
4. Table 1; for the baseline comparability of the two groups, it would have been
better if the number of previous IVF/ICSI attempts have been given and
compared.
5. Table 2; it would have been better to give the FSH dose as IU rather than
number of amps/vials.
6. Table 2; for the variable "Follicles >18 mm in diameter" should better be given
as "Follicles >18 mm in diameter on the day of hCG administration".
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:3Date:12 September 2014
Reviewer: Annika Strandell
Reviewer's report:
This randomised controlled trial (RCT) compares the effect of transvaginal
aspiration of hydrosalpinges at oocyte retrieval with salpingectomy prior to IVF,
for patients with hydrosalpinx. It is described as intended to be a non-inferiority
trial, showing that aspiration is not inferior to salpingectomy, the latter being
proved effective in several trials. The authors realise that the required sample
size is too large to manage within the available timeframe and decide instead to
conduct an underpowered study, which may be included in a future
meta-analysis.
This is the first RCT comparing aspiration with salpingectomy in patients with
hydrosalpinx, planned to undergo IVF and it certainly merits recognition.
Major comments
I have one major comment concerning the subgroup analysis of patients with
re-accumulation of fluid or not. I cannot find in the registration that this was a
pre-specified subgroup analysis. If not, it cannot be included in the conclusion.
Since the aim of the study was to compare aspiration to salpingectomy, the main
conclusion should be based on that result.
The other major comment concern how the results are presented. In a RCT, an
intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis should be the primary presentation of results.
Accordingly, the flow chart should be changed to include 80 in each group. The
clinical pregnancy per started cycle is the primary outcome according to ITT and
should be presented as the main result. This could also be mentioned in the
section on statistical analysis.
Minor comments:
Line 128-130. Was aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid performed after oocyte
retrival? This could be stated.
Lines 128-140. The follow-up protocol was not the same in both groups, since
the salpingectomy group did not undergo ultrasound examination as often as the
aspiration group. Thus, there is no documentation on whether this group had any
fluid in the cavity. This could be commented on in the Discussion as a limitation.
Lines 230-234. It could be added that the study by Hammadieh was stopped in
advance due to recruitment difficulties, and the targeted sample size was not
reached.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:3Date:18 September 2014
Reviewer: Puneet Arora
Reviewer's report:
General Comments
1. There are unnecessary spaces before punctuation marks throughout the
manuscript
2. Any number which is not at the beginning of the sentence can be written in
figures and does not have to be written in words.
3. line 23 and line 92- add 'of' after management
4. line 251- agreement instead of agree
5.line 253- have instead of has
6.Table-3 started instead of stared
Abstract
7. Please write the p values in the results of the abstracts
Methods
8. The section on the description of the interventions is slightly convoluted and
confusing. I suggest that the authors first describe the control intervention -
salpingectomy, stimulation and ultrasound, and then describe the study
intervention - stimulation, aspiration, ultrasounds.
Results-
9. Have the authors found any factors where re-accumulation of hydrosalpinx
was more likely?
10. What was the trend for embryo transfer in either arm? Were they done in
fresh cycles or frozen cycles ?
Discussion
11. The first 2 paragraphs of the discussion are essentially repetition of the
results and can be omitted.
12. A small passage in the end summarising the place of salpingectomy,
aspiration and micro insert in the management of hydrosalpinx based on the
authors findings and literature review . The message from this study should be
clearly given to the readers that aspiration may have a role in visible hydrosalpinx
but as per this study there is a one-third chance of re-accumulation .
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:4Date:4 November 2014
Reviewer: hakan yarali
Reviewer's report:
Having made the requested revision, the manuscript can now be published with
no additional revision required.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:4Date:28 October 2014
Reviewer: Annika Strandell
Reviewer's report:
After revision, several adjustments have been made, although not all of those
suggested. I believe that the study results are of interest to all of those who deal
with hydrosalpinx patients and thus publication could be recommended.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
However, I strongly recommend that the conclusion is reformulated, starting with
the inconclusive results comparing aspiration to salpingectomy. Then the results
from subgroup analyses based on reaccumulation of fluid can be concluded
upon, using no stronger word than suggest.
Other recommended alterations are:
L198. State that the results on reaccumulation are from the aspiration group.
State whther any in the surgery had re-accumulation or otherwise, if that was the
case, state that it was not recorded for the surgery group.
L217. State that the sample size was not large enough to neither detect a
difference, or to prove non-inferiority.
L222. Replace revealed with suggest, since these refer to subgroup analyses.
L227. Do not use “contradictory results” but rather “inconclusive results, since
there is only one underpowered RCT and two small retrospective observational
studies”.
Minor Essential Revisions
Table 2. Omit ampoules.
There are still some spelling errors to be corrected.
Discretionary Revisions
L224. You may add that no predictive factors among available baseline variables
were found.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:4Date:29 October 2014
Reviewer: Puneet Arora
Reviewer's report:
Authors have not included p value in the abstract.
I would like authors to include p values in the abstract as mentioned before.
Authors state that "It will be too long and confusing sentence if we write P value"
I would then suggest to omit the percentages in abstract and replace it with p
values. Percentages have been mentioned by authors in detail in the main article
and hence not needed in the abstract .
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Ultrasound guided aspiration of hydrosalpinx fluid versus salpingectomy in
the management of patients with ultrasound visible hydrosalpinx undergoing
IVF-ET. A randomized controlled trial
Version:5Date:12 December 2014
Reviewer: Annika Strandell
Reviewer's report:
I find the ms acceptable for publication after the latest revisions. However, "the"
should be added line 199 (the aspiration group) as well as twice on line 312 (The
salpingectomy group and the aspiration group).
Reviewer's report
Title:Effectiveness of endometrial resection transcervical hysteroscopic based
preventive treatment on the recurrence of endometrial polyps in
post-menopausal women.
Version:6Date:6 December 2014
Reviewer: Tirso Perez-Medina
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript is helpful undoubtedly and offers a new light in the common
case of endometrial polyps in postmenopausal patients.
Notwithstanding, it is too long in the introduction and discussion sections thus
making difficult the correct interpretation of the data
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Effectiveness of endometrial resection transcervical hysteroscopic based
preventive treatment on the recurrence of endometrial polyps in
post-menopausal women.
Version:6Date:13 December 2014
Reviewer: Francisco Carmona
Reviewer's report:
The paper by Jimenez et al deals with an interesting topic as prevention of
recurrence after treatment of endometrial polyps is. They conclude that
endometrial resection associated to polyp extirpation is useful in preventing
recurrence.
There are some points that need to be addressed before publication:
1.-Introduction section is is too long. Authors should focus on the current state of
the problem they want to deal (polyp recurrence) instead of making a so long
description about ethiology, prevalence or pathway to malignancy.
2.-The author must define clearly what definition of "success" they used in the
methods. Also they must clearly state which was the recurrence rate. The
statistical comparisons made in Tables 2 and 3 are difficult to follow. The authors
must clarify it. I do not understand the different figures displayed in Tables 2 and
3. Furthermore, if Table 2 refers to the overall population and Table 3 split this
population in patients taking and not taking Tamoxifen, then the sume of this two
different kind of patients must equalize the figures in Table 2, but it does not
happen.
3.- Were there any other risk factor, different to tamoxifen, associated to polyp
recurrence? Did the authors analyze it?. Maybe a logistic regression analysis
may be of interest.
4.- According to the authors (references 25-27) the recurrence rate in the
literature ranges from to 2.4 to 8.5%. How this rate compares with the authors
recurrence rate?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Contraceptive use and associated factors among postpartum women in
Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:19 April 2014
Reviewer: Yohannes Adama Melaku
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests