Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Psychological distress and self -rated health status in reproduc tive aged women with pain: 
findings from a national, cross -sectional survey  
 
Version: 0 Date: 09 Dec 2018  
 
Reviewer: Mike Armour  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thanks to the authors for this interesting paper looking at the relationship between pain severity 
and distress in reproductive aged women, with a focus on the antenatal and postpartum period. 
Overall I think this is an excellent piece of work and only hav e minor comments.  
Line 78: Is there any examples for bodily pain that are used in the questioning process ? might 
help give the reader some idea of what can fall under 'bodily pain'  
Line 121 -128: While it is clear that self -rated health status changes w ith pain severity, the 
wording implies that as pain severity goes up self -rated health status goes down. But looking at 
Fig 1 (a) this doesn't seem to be quite so simple. The proportion of women rating their health as 
'excellent' is higher in the severe pa in group than in the no pain group. Perhaps a few words just 
so those who read the text only are aware of this.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the author s. 
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your commen ts 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 require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I recommend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of compe ting 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 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 relatin g 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 h ave 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 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 included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal