Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Understanding alcohol as an element of 'care practices' in adult White British women's  
everyday personal relationships: a qualitative study  
 
Version: 2 Date: 24 Jul 2017  
 
Reviewer: Mary Boulton  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is an interesting paper, particularly the use of a social practices perspective and of the 
Feminist Ethics of Care as a conceptual framework.  It has the potential to make a valuable 
contribution to the literatur e.  However, there are a few points which need further clarification or 
explanation.  
 
1.  The paper is least convincing in the section on 'Alcohol in practices of caring for self' (page 
18).  On page 11 the author states that the focus of the paper is on women's use of alcohol in 
couple relationships and the analysis works well in the conte xt of relationships with others.  The 
examples on pages 18 and 19 which refer to care of self, however, sound more like efforts to 
escape or punish themselves than aspects of caring.  The statement 'they turned to their body for 
care' (page 19) is difficul t to understand as is 'women placing emphasis on themselves and their 
own bodies to deal with social problems' (page 22 line 524).  Both need further clarification.  
 
2.  Page 2 and page 10:  The author refers to the method of analysis as 'inductive' which is far too 
general:  an inductive approach underpins virtually all qualitative research as it moves from 
specific observations to broader generalisations and theories.  There is a reference of page 10 to 
drawing on 'narrative approaches which focus on the ways stories are told' but there is little 
evidence of an analysis of narratives (eg the type or form of narrative, the way the narrator 
positions herself in relation to the listener, etc) in the paper.  In the same paragraph the author 
refers to 'pulling out what were considered remarkable features of their narratives' and coding 
transcripts.  It is not clear what is meant by 'remarkable features of their narratives' nor why only 
'remarkable' features were pulled out but overall this description sounds lik e thematic analysis.  
This section is confusing and the author needs to provide a clearer account of and rationale for 
the methods of data analysis used.   
 
3.  Page 8, lines 176 to 180.  The term 'sampling frame' is used incorrectly here:  what is 
describ ed is inclusion criteria, not a list of individuals from whom the sample will be selected.  
This needs to be corrected.  
 
4.  The substance of the paper is good but meanings are sometimes obscured by the way it is 
written.  Poor grammar and awkward expressi on are evident in several places and the paper 
would benefit from editing with an experienced co -author.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
No 
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 addition al statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
Not relevant to this manuscript  
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 ga in 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 f uture?  
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  
I agree to the open 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 th e 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 included as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal