Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Traumatic events: Exploring associations with maternal depression, infant bonding, and  
oxytocin in Latina mothers  
 
Version: 2 Date: 02 Nov 2017  
 
Reviewer: Tiffany A. Moore Simas  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I want to extend my sincerest thanks to the authors for the opportunity to review this manuscript.  
This study explored the association of child/adult/birth traumatic experi ences, maternal -infant 
bonding, postpartum depression, and oxytocin levels, specifically in a Latina population.  I 
would suggest the following revisions:  
 
 
 
Abstract:  
 
- Given the small sample size and stated exploratory nature of the study, the conclusions are too 
strong and should be pared back.  Certainly additional work in this area is merited.  
 
 
 
Background:  
 
- Last 2 sentences of paragraph 1 are saying the same thing only making a distinction between 
'traumatic histories' and 'IPV histories' - - as IPV his tory is arguably a traumatic history (as 
indicated in the 3 sentence of this paragraph),  the distinction between these two sentences is not 
clear and thus confusing.  Please clarify and/or condense.  
 
 
 
Methods:  
 
- Participants Section  
        o Remove last s entence to results section, include % breast versus bottle feed  
 
        o Include eligibility/ineligibility criteria  
 
- Procedure section would benefit from a figure depicting what data was collected at which time 
points:  
 
        o Third trimester enrollmen t (face to face) - demographics, depr/anx, trauma hx  
 
        o 4 wk postpartum (phone) - depr/anx, breast feeding  
 
        o 8 wk postpartum (lab) - lab, depr/anx, trauma  
 
- Please indicate when bonding was assessed  
 
 
 
- Measures  
 
        o The abstract indicate s that higher scores on the PBQ represent more compromised 
bonding however the measures section does not elaborate on this.  It is worth repeating here and 
potentially elsewhere in manuscript as many readers will not be familiar with this scale  
 
        o Clarify on p. 10 line 41 whether women fed their infant using either bottle or breast for 10 
minutes as per their personal preference or whether this was assigned by the study  
 
 
 
- Data analysis section  
 
        o The  penultimate sentence in this section menti oned the exploratory nature of this study - 
this merits mention earlier as part of background and again at start of discussion  
 
 
 
Results:  
 
- It is hard to put the high rates of PPD in context when eligibility/ineligibility critieria are not 
provided.  Additionally, as previously noted would move demographics of participants here as 
there are several associated with increased risk PPD and thus  these in addition to focus on Latina 
population provides some insight.  This merits discussion in the discussion section.  
 
- P. 13 - line 26 - the authors refer to the 'number' of infant -related traumatic events - was this 
really a number of a categorical yes/no variable?  
 
- As IPV is being pointed out specifically in results and discussion, consider adding a relevant 
column to the table  
 
 
 
Discussion:  
 
- Given the small numbers, exploratory nature of study and numerous comparisons. . .the study 
discussion shou ld start by addressing this again.   
- See prior note regarding high rates of PPD - would be worthwhile adding relevant literature 
when stating that 'these rates surpass those of the general popualtion'  
 
- Consider discussion point ref role of breast/bottle  feeding in results  
 
- Consider collecting data on exogenous oxytocin exposure (e.g. labor induction, labor 
augmentation, and/or postpartum hemorrhage prevention) and comment to how this exposure 
may/may not alter these results  
 
 
Other:  
 
- There are some mino r occasional grammatical errors - please review.  
 
- The term infant trauma focuses the reader on the infant rather than on the mother's experience, 
consider renaming birth -outcome related traumatic events are something that implies that it is the 
mother's e xperience of the event that is relevant  
 
 
 
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 req uire 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:  
 
Acceptable  
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following qu estions:  
 
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 i nterests 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.  
 
I agree to the ope n 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 along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n 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 report can be in cluded as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal