JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Clustering Iranian Women according to their Menopausal Severity Symptoms and
Exploring the Factors Associated with Severe Categories, using Baseline Category Logit Model
Version: 7 Date: 13 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Editor,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the article "Clustering Iranian Women According
to Their Menopausal Severity Symptoms and Exploring the Factors Associated with Severe
Categories, using Baseline Category Logit Model. Please consider the following comments:
Update References
Incorporate Recent Studies: Strengthen the literature review by including more recent studies
that explore menopausal symptoms, their prevalence, and effective management strategies,
particularly focusing on Iranian women. This will provide a broader context and highlight
advancements in the field.
Rationale for Statistical Methods: Provide a more detailed rationale for the chosen statistical
methods, especially the K-Means clustering and baseline category logit model. Discuss why
these methods are appropriate for your data and how they enhance the analysis.
Concrete Interventions:
Based on the findings, suggest specific interventions such as:
Tailored educational programs for women entering menopause to manage symptoms effectively.
Promotion of regular physical activity through community-based programs. Psychological
support services to address mental health issues associated with menopause.
Cultural Perceptions of Menopause: Discuss how cultural attitudes towards menopause in Iran
may influence symptom severity and reporting. This could include societal expectations, stigma,
and the role of family and community support.
Title: Clustering Iranian Women according to their Menopausal Severity Symptoms and
Exploring the Factors Associated with Severe Categories, using Baseline Category Logit Model
Version: 7 Date: 16 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
I have carefully reviewed the revised version of the manuscript, and I am pleased with the
changes the authors have made. They have addressed all of my previous concerns. I am satisfied
with the current version and recommend that the paper be accepted for publication.
Thank you.
Title: Clustering Iranian Women according to their Menopausal Severity Symptoms and
Exploring the Factors Associated with Severe Categories, using Baseline Category Logit Model
Version: 7 Date: 18 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Clustering Iranian women according to their menopausal severity symptoms and exploring the
factors associated with severe categories, using baseline category logit model
Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript. Please see my comments as follows:
Overall, this paper has some grammatical and typo errors and should be edited by a person who
is expert in English literature.
Abstract
1. Why authors recruited women with age 42 to 60?  were they perimenopausal or
postmenopausal?
Introduction
1. Please use updated and larger studies in Iran for reporting the age of menopause. Reference
number 6 and 7 are quite old.
Methods
1. Please explain the multi-stage, and simple random selection in your study. For instance, from
how many public health center, did you select five, and how many participants were selected
from each center?
2. In the inclusion criteria, authors claimed that they recruited postmenopausal women, while
few line later they stated that they also recruited premenopausal women and perimenopausal
women.
3. please name and explain the subscales of MSSI-38 questionnaire.
Results
1. Table 1: There is a mistake with the summing numbers of marital status, please correct it.
2. Table 1 and 3: The number of children  should be #5
3. underlying should be “underlying disease”
4. Psychological should be “psychological disease”.
5. Number of children in table 1 and 3 should be  #3
6. Write the proper unit for each variable such as age, and BMI.
7. How authors assessed anxiety and depression of participants?
8. Table 2: please provide n(%) for pain in the muscles and joints.
9. Table 3: Please report number with percentages for each cluster.
10. Please report p=0.000 as p<0.0001.
11. Table 5: Physical activity should be “physical inactivity”
Discussion
1. Authors should have more focus on the results of logistic regression.
Title: The correlation between immune cells and endometriosis: A bidirectional two-sample
Mendelian randomization study
Version: 0 Date: 21 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
This article addresses a critical topic in the context of endometriosis, highlighting the
growing evidence suggesting that immune dysregulation underlies the ectopic implantation
and persistence of endometrial tissue. While the study offers valuable insights, several aspects
require revision:
1. Limitations of Mendelian Randomization (MR):
a. The manuscript should critically discuss the limitations of MR, including the possibility of
selection bias due to non-random selection of participants. Additionally, reverse causation can
complicate interpretations, especially if the disease influences the risk factor through pathways
not captured by the genetic variants used. These limitations are crucial to understanding the
scope and reliability of the study's findings.
b. Also, the use of terms such as "causal" and "causality" should be avoided. The data presented
only show modest associations, suggesting no significant relationship. Terms that accurately
reflect the strength of the data, such as "association," would be more precise and reflective of
the findings. For complex traits influenced by multiple genetic and environmental factors, such
as endometriosis, it can be challenging to identify suitable instrumental variables that satisfy
all MR assumptions. While the use of MR is promising, the results should be interpreted with
caution.
2. Updated References:
a. References 1 and/or 2 should be substituted with newer and more comprehensive reviews on
endometriosis, such as the one published in the New England Journal of Medicine (doi: 10.1056/
NEJMra1810764). This would provide readers with the most current understanding and context
regarding endometriosis.
b. The discussion on molecular pathways would benefit from including important evidence on
endometriosis dysregulation beyond the reproductive system. I recommend incorporating the
following references to enrich the discussion:
doi: 10.1007/s11154-023-09826-0
doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109298
In conclusion, while the study sheds light on the potential role of immune cells in endometriosis,
addressing these points will enhance the manuscript's clarity, accuracy, and comprehensiveness.
Title: The correlation between immune cells and endometriosis: A bidirectional two-sample
Mendelian randomization study
Version: 0 Date: 07 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (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 minor issues
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with 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?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The study provides interesting results that would be difficult to
obtain otherwise. The authors examined clearly their findings.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
The authors should explain if (and if not, how and why) other factors do not intervene with their
results, for ex BMI, age, treatment, menopause etc..
It is not clear what kind of samples were used for the public database, blood? Tissue ?
They should provide a table synthesizing the results.
They should add in this table the type of findings (for ex, B cells, etc), many factors cited are
not clear about their function, for ex what is a cd4 c27 cell ?
The discussion should be enriched with more previous findings compared to the current results.
Title: Association between Lifetime Endogenous Estrogen Exposure and Body Composition
Metrics in Postmenopausal Women: Findings from the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study
Version: 4 Date: 11 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Phuc Nhon Nguyen
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your interesting paper. The paper is well written.
-Please remove yellow track in Study flowchart.
-Please add the information of year and country of product concerning SPSS version 22.0
-Please also expand the symptoms in postmenopausal  bleeding women. Nguyen PN,
Nguyen VT. Evaluating Clinical Features in Intracavitary Uterine Pathologies among
Vietnamese Women Presenting with Peri-and Postmenopausal Bleeding: A Bicentric
Observational Descriptive Analysis. J Midlife Health. 2022 Jul-Sep;13(3):225-232. doi:
10.4103/jmh.jmh_81_22. Epub 2023 Jan 14. PMID: 36950211; PMCID: PMC10025815.
-English editing is required.
Title: Associations between mental health conditions in pregnancy and maternal socioeconomic
status: A population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada
Version: 2 Date: 04 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript titled "Associations between mental
health conditions in pregnancy and maternal socioeconomic status: A population-based
retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada". This work explores risk factors for prenatal
depression and anxiety as well as the underlying  mechanisms that are moderating those
associations. Furthermore, it raises questions regarding health inequity in Canada, where
regardless of the availability of universal healthcare, disparities in the prevalance of prenatal
mental health problems were discovered.
I found the study insightful and of highest quality. The sample size and use of the objective
registry-based data make the disovered associations more reliable. The methods and results are
described in sufficient details, the figures are clear and easy to interpret. The most novel studies
are used to support the authors' arguments in the intriduction and discussion sections.
My only concern is regarding the outcome measures. First, it is unclear whether the authors
are focusing on the antenatal or lifetime depression and/or anxiety. From the description in
the methods section it seems that the outcome includes pre-existing conditions ("The BIS
retrieval included any maternal mental health concerns during this pregnancy including those
pre-existing, diagnosed during pregnancy or active during pregnancy."). I believe there should
be a clear distinction or the authors should clearly indicate how many of the participants
with acute depression and/or anxiety during pregnancy have had them before pregnancy. The
authors further mention that for the outcome of anxiety and/or depression they also included the
participants who were taking SSRIs. However, this group of medication is often prescribed for
other conditions (such as panic attacks, PTSD, etc), so it would make more sense to include those
participants in the "any mental health conditions" group, unless the authors have information
in the registry that SSRIs were prescribed specifically  for depression and/or anxiety. I would
suggest to limit the "depression and/or anxiety" group only to the combination of the anxiety
and depression variables. Finally, more information is needed regarding the  "any mental health
conditions in pregnancy" outcome. It only says in the methods that it is based on yes/no question,
but how specifically was it determined? Was it based on the ICD codes, similar to depression
and anxiety variables (then what codes were included?) or was it rather based on the self-
reported single question? If you have access to the medication information, could women taking
medication used for mental health conditions treatment other than SSRIs be included here?
Please, provide more description and inclusion rationale here.
I am looking forward to reading the revised version. Best of luck with this great study!
Title: Associations between mental health conditions in pregnancy and maternal socioeconomic
status: A population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada
Version: 2 Date: 09 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for letting me review this article about SES and antenatal depression and anxiety. The
paper was very clear, well designed and well written. I did not come up with many comments.
I was wondering was the novelty of the paper. As low SES (income or education level) is
associated with various mental health outcomes, I missed information and discussion about
how antenatal period would be different from the overall risk and why is it important to study
specifically antenatal period.
Another thing was that although low income quintile was associated with anxiety, I think more
discussion could be generated on the finding that the anxiety curve was actually quite even for
the income quintiles. This finding is somewhat in line with the literature where anxiety may
not be as strongly associated with low SES as some other mental health disorders, ref 13 for
example. Discussion on this phenomenon.
I think if these two points could be considered more carefully in the paper, it would provide
more interest.
Title: Associations between mental health conditions in pregnancy and maternal socioeconomic
status: A population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada
Version: 4 Date: 23 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to re-review the manuscript.
Please, find my comments below.
Lines 60-65: If you are not intending to address any of the mechanisms via which SES affects
maternal mental health, you should not mention them. This paragraph also feels more appropriate
for the Discussion section.
Lines 66-67: It is unclear what message you are trying to send with this message. It seems like
you are introducing a contradiction that you are going to address, while afterwards you indicate
that you yourselves will also focus on the risk factors related to SES. Please, remove or modify.
Also, please present here why it is important “especially in Ontario, Canada”? Is there a drastic
difference in the geographical regions of this part of Canada? What are the statistics? Are there
particular underprivileged areas? What are the health conditions there? Please, present a bigger
picture if you highlight that this study is especially important in Ontario, Canada.
Line 126: You indicate that you accessed data on self-report and clinical diagnoses of depression,
anxiety and any mental health problems. How was the self-report measured? These are very
different levels of outcomes, I believe it should be either very clearly explained how the self-
reports were collected or those cases should not be included the same way as definite ICD
diagnoses.
Lines 138-141: Since you have the category “any mental health problems”, the users of SSRIs
should be included there, unless you can confirm that those medications were used specifically
for treating depression and/or anxiety, you cannot just assume that.
General comment: I am not convinced about the novelty of the study. Yes, it is a great dataset,
but the explored associations between SES and antenatal depression and anxiety are well
established, which is nicely reflected in the discussion. There is no approach in exploring the
mechanisms, for example, or some characteristics specific to Ontario, Canada, e.g. comparing
the most privileged areas with the most marginalised ones. Please, clarify how your study is
unique from the previous results of big meta-analyses and systematic reviews.
Title: Associations between mental health conditions in pregnancy and maternal socioeconomic
status: A population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada
Version: 4 Date: 26 Nov 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: Overall Impression of the Revised Manuscript
The revised manuscript demonstrates a thorough effort to address reviewer feedback, presenting
a clear, well-structured, and insightful analysis of the associations between neighborhood
socioeconomic status (SES) and mental health conditions during pregnancy. The use of a large,
population-based dataset enhances the reliability of findings, and the discussion effectively
contextualizes the implications of these results within the framework of health inequity in a
universal healthcare system.
Strengths of the Revised Manuscript
1. Comprehensive Revisions: The authors have made substantial revisions in response to
reviewer comments, particularly improving clarity in methods, discussion, and the framing of
conclusions.
2. Clear Explanation of Limitations: The manuscript now includes detailed discussions on
limitations, such as the use of neighborhood SES as a proxy for individual SES, data constraints,
and the implications of including pre-existing mental health conditions.
Recommendation
The authors have sufficiently addressed reviewer concerns, and the manuscript presents a
valuable contribution to the field of perinatal mental health research. While minor areas for
improvement exist, they do not detract from the overall quality and significance of the study. I
recommend accepting the manuscript in its current form."
Title: Validation of the Premenstrual Symptoms Questionnaire Among Mongolian Nursing
School Students
Version: 1 Date: 25 Aug 2024
Reviewer:  Mahboubeh Dadfar
Reviewer's report:
Sunday, August 25, 2024
Dear Authors,
Thank you so much for your good Manuscript entitled "Translation and Validation of the
Premenstrual Symptoms’ Questionnaire in Mongolian language: A cross- sectional Study
Among Nursing School students".
This is a valuable study. Here are my comments.
1. Title should change to “Validation of the Premenstrual Symptoms Questionnaire among
Mongolian Nursing students”.
2. Keywords should change to “validity, reliability, premenstrual symptoms Questionnaire,
nursing, students, Mongolia.”
3. Authors should write research questions or assumptions of their study in the end of
Introduction section.
4. Authors should report validity and reliability original form the Premenstrual Symptoms
Questionnaire as well as all used scales in the Measures subsection.
5. Authors should write their suggestions for future studies.
6. The paper should edit by a native English person.
7. Authors should add DOI for all References.
Sincerely,
Title: Validation of the Premenstrual Symptoms Questionnaire Among Mongolian Nursing
School Students
Version: 3 Date: 22 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Mahboubeh Dadfar
Reviewer's report:
Friday, November 22, 2024
Dear Authors,
All of my comments have been done.
The paper can publish in its current form.
Thank you so much again.
Reviewer
Title: Mediating role of anxiety between body image distress and quality of life among women
with polycystic ovary syndrome: a multicentre cross-sectional study
Version: 1 Date: 18 May 2024
Reviewer:  Somayeh Abdolahian
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors
Below I made some notes and provocations that I made with the aim of improving it for a future
submission.
Abstract: • It would be helpful to include the time frame of the study. It would be beneficial to
explain what BID stands for the first time it is mentioned.
Method: The use of convenient sampling is mentioned, but it’s important to discuss the potential
limitations of this method, such as selection bias. Diagnosis of PCOS was not clear in the
methods and should be included (through what criteria and by whom has it been diagnosed?)
Please explain why you did not include high weight in the study entry criteria?
Please specify the time period covered by the questions for each questionnaire. For example, in
the quality of life questions, how many weeks ago was the person asked?
Warm regards
Title: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Hysteroscopy in Ethiopia: A Retrospective Study on Practice
and Outcomes
Version: 1 Date: 15 May 2024
Reviewer:  Atef M. Darwish
Reviewer's report:
This is a retrospective study of a surface introduced in a hospital. Just a collection of cases.
So, please change the title to remove a review and add a retrospective study. You should show
and discuss explanations of hysteroscopic findings like why you reported a high rate of IUAs
despite your reported secondary amenorrhea in only  (18%),  and abnormal uterine bleeding
(8.8%).  Against your report, most of your cases were nulliparous with no history of deliver,
abortion, or CS.
How can you explain endometrial polyps (18%) and submucosal myoma (9%) despite the low
complaint of AUB in (8.8%). ?
Spelling and typing problems are evident.
Title: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Hysteroscopy in Ethiopia: A Retrospective Study on Practice
and Outcomes
Version: 1 Date: 22 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,
I believe this study addresses an important gap  and improving clinical practice in context of
developing country. Methodology is well defined.
Results are presented clearly and summarized.
However Certain  areas needs improvement:
1. Keywords: Write these in Mesh Terms in alphabetical order.
2. Introduction:  Can you write in the format of background, rationale, objectives (STROBE
GUIDELINES)
3. Methodology is well defined. However can you please list out how the endometrial cavity
was evaluated? You can see from recently published researches from 3rd world countries.
4. Discussion seems short. Please compare and contrast the findings from similar other countries
too. Adding little more discussion would make it a better research.
5. The topic doesn't properly address the findings. Your title, objective and conclusion should
address each other.
Title: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Hysteroscopy in Ethiopia: A Retrospective Study on Practice
and Outcomes
Version: 3 Date: 27 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Vinita Sarbhai
Reviewer's report:
1. The number tally is very confusing. All Operative hysteroscopies should be clubbed together.
No need to put one category as Diagnostic with operative as all hysteroscopies are always
diagnostic to start with, if some finding comes one operates otherwise it's only Diagnostic.
2. The denominator for calculation should always remain the same i.e. 328. It keeps on changing,
somewhere it is 181, somewhere  328
3. Please clarify if the endocervical polyp was removed through a hysteroscope or general
surgery. If it is not by hysteroscopy it should not be added to this review