Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Prevalence of dysmenorrhea and predictors of its pain intensity among Palestinian female 
university s tudents  
 
Version: 0 Date: 20 Nov 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Fatai  Maruf  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
The authors have reported on prevalence of dysmenorrhea and predictors of its pain intensity 
among Palestinian female university studen ts. This study is timely and relevant in view of a 
dearth of report on this subject from a female palestinian population. Having a report like this 
from different countries will make international comparison and within -continent pooling of data 
possible. H owever, there are some issues regarding this manuscript that need to be addressed 
before publication.  
 
 
ABSTRACT  
 
- Line 21 to 22:The statement  'The mean±SD of pain was 64 (80.34%)......................................' 
is difficult to understand. There is no indication of a mean value or SD in the sentence.  
 
- It will be more helpful to state the specific univariate and multivariate analyses employed. This 
will make it easier for the reader to make a better sense of the result.  
 
 
BACKGROUND  
 
- Apart from the  first paragraph that presents different definition of dysmenorrhea, there is no 
attempt to describe dysmenorrhea in a way to enable someone who has not experienced it to 
understand its nature in terms of presentation, reported predisposing factors, source s of relief, 
psychological and socio -economic impacts etc. Another paragraph after the first one could be 
used to do justice to this.  
 
- Line 48: Change 'mong' to 'among'.  
 
 
METHODOLOGY  
 
- A questionnaire was developed by generating questions from a revie w of relevant literature. 
However, there is no report of how this questionnaire was validated. In addition a vivid 
description of the questionnaire, in terms the nature of response set and whether the 
questionnaire items were grouped into domains or not, i s not provided.  
 
- Copies of the questionnaire were distributed at 7 different sites from 12 to 1 pm over four days. 
Did the authors involve research assistants? How many were they? How were the copies of 
questionnaire collected back?  
 
- The authors state that ethical approval was obtained from an institutional review board, but do 
not specify the board. It is required that the name of an institutional review board is stated.  
 
- The author stated that variables were categorised to facilitate analysis. Were all variables 
categorised? What was the nature of categorization?  
 
- It is not imformative enough to state that univariate and multivariate analyses were employed. 
It will be more helpful to the reader to specify the univariate and multivariate analyses em ployed.  
 
- Lines 48 -50 (last paragraph): The sentence 'Univariate analysis ..................' has to be reviewed.  
 
 
RESULTS  
 
- Lines 31 -38 (First paragraph):The senetence 'When asked about............................................ 
approximately 800 USD.' has to be reviewed.  
 
- Lines 12 -14 (Second paragraph): The sentence 'Univariate analysis ................................... .. 
those having no pain.' has to be reviewed.    
 
 
DISCUSSION  
 
- I suggest the authors find away of summarising the prevalence rates from different countries in 
the first paragraph of discussion. In stead of reviewing them one by one, the rates could be 
reported as a range to give a picture of the position of the current finding in the reported range.  
 
- Line 41 (last sentence of the last paragraph): I suggest the authors rephrase the sentence to 
mean the need to interprete the data with caution.  
 
- Lines 1 2-17 (First paragraph): The sentence 'A review study ............................. in Bangladesh,' 
need to be reviewed.  
 
- Lines 17 -19 (First paragraph): The sentence 'A study conducted ................................ having 
moderate to severe pain.' has to be reviewed.  
 
- Lines 58 -17 (Second paragraph): The sentence ' In Saudi Arabia, a study conducted 
.......................... were depressed mood and anger.' has to be reviewed.  
 
- Lines 16 -17 (Second paragraph): Change 'reported' to 'report'.  
 
- Lines 5 5-556 (Third paragraph): Remove 'and its role'.  
- Lines 16 -16 (Third paragraph): The phrase 'Association between .................... and irregular 
menses' has to be reviewed.  
 
 
CONCLUSION  
 
- The conclusion needs to be based on the objectives of the study. Other pieces of information in 
the form of recommendations could be part of the discussion.  
 
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.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 am able to assess the statistics  
 
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 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 o r 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 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 jo urnal. 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 fo r 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