Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Predictors of contraceptive use among adolescent girls  and young women (AGYW) aged 
15 to 24 years in South Africa: results from the 2012 national populati on-based household survey  
 
Version: 1 Date: 27 Sep 2019  
 
Reviewer: Kim Jonas  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thank you for revising the manuscript, the paper has improved significantly. I however, still 
have a few comments and questions to the authors... please see below:  
 
 
Abstract  
 
Discussion s hould perhaps be "conclusion" based on your study finding, not other "evidence"…  
 
 
Background  
 
General comment: it appears that you are using "unplanned" and "unintended" 
interchangeable…? I'd advise against that… these are two independent (negative) outcomes (or 
consequences) of either unmet need or non use or poor use of contraceptives. So I'd use  them 
separately as "unplanned and unintended pregnancies"… "/" is not exactly academically accepted 
writing either so write it in full as  in "and or"…  
 
Line 106 -118 talks about several predicting factors then goes on to say its imperative to 
understanding  these factors (which have already been described, and since this is not a 
qualitative study, how is that understanding going to be achieved..? and if there factors have 
described already - what is this study adding then…?) hence I see it diluting the argum ent put 
from line 119 -130 and somehow brings questions to why then are you conducting this study… 
some points in the paragraph are sure warranted and can be used elsewhere but I'd remove them 
from here, and proceed from line 105 straight to 119 till the en d of this section.  
 
 
Methods  
 
Table 1 is not necessary; the report is published and available for one - just make the reference to 
it and provide the full reference for readers who want detailed info to be able to access it  
 
 
Results  
 
Line 206 -207: I'm not und erstanding why this sentence is here, especially if the subheading is 
contraceptive use - on your response to reviewers you indicated that you have removed the 
confusing figures but here I see 42 547 and 4139 and yet report on the 1406.. perhaps you need 
to make it clear on the methods section and at the beginning of this section that this paper only 
reports on the 1406 participants and remove any other figures.. otherwise the confusion is still 
there…  
 
Line 213: 2.3% reported having and IUD during the yr 201 1/2012…? That's interesting…  
 
Line 217: sample characteristics usually come first so one has an idea of the demographics for 
the outcome variable…? I almost want to go back and read the previous section now that I have 
this info…?  
 
Line 220: how many is "mo st"?? consider providing %  
 
Table 2, consider adding the "%" next to figures under the column percentage in sub -sample  
 
Table 3, typo in the title - "by among"…  
 
 
Discussion  
 
Line 330: I'm not sure what's happening on the referencing there…  
 
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 t he manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary 
from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly 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 gai n 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 com peting 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.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or 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 an 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