Title: Prevalence and factors associated with post-abortion contraceptive uptake at Mbagala
Hospital, Temeke, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Version: 4 Date: 26 Sep 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?
No - there are minor issues
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?
No - there are major issues
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?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: This is a revised manuscript reporting on the uptake of post abortion
contraception in a hospital in Tanzania. The authors have been primarily responsive to the
previous reviews. Some minor to moderate issues remain.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
In general this is an interesting manuscript but I have a few suggestions to improve the clarity
for potential readers. 1. The title should read post abortion not ""abortal""; 2. in the abstract,
the first sentence is confusing and hard to follow, since this is the first thing a reader sees, it's
important to be clear. In the abstract and throughout the manuscript the authors use the term
""modern contraception"" but do not defined it. It is unclear if this is meant to differentiate from
natural family planning methods or condoms or to only refer to LARC? 3. the abstract conclusion
refers to women 25 and over as older - which does not make sense. 4. In the keywords I suggest
removing the term women and adding counseling. 5. The intro begins with the term ""family
planning"" it would make more sense to say contraception since the goal of the research is about
contraceptive use and not about spacing or planning pregnancies. 6. Line 101 - thesis statement
should be past tense 7. line 110 should be convenience sampling. 8.Line 122 should not say ""I
assume"" but instead the authors assume or we 9. Line 142 is repetitive to the statements above.
10. Line 230 - typo should be results ""are"" 11. the limitations section is too brief - readers are
not told what the items were in the survey/interview and since it was done at one hospital the
results are not generalizable. Was the interview guide/survey validated? 12. The discussion gives
no indication as to why the results were lower than in other regions. 13. There is no mention of
partners - to what extent do women post abortion want or need to discuss contraception with a
partner? Does a partner potentially serve as a barrier to use of contraception?
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Should be reviewed for language quality"