JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: The overtreatment rate, medical cost and psychological affection of see-and-treat versus
three-step approaches in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review
and meta- analysis
Version: 0 Date: 23 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript titled “The overtreatment rate, medical cost and
psychological affection of see-and-treat versus three-step approaches in the treatment of cervical
intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis” , which falls within the aim
of the journal.
This study aims to systematically review and compare the outcomes of the see-and-treat
and three-step approaches in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, focusing on
overtreatment rates, medical costs, and psychological effects.
In my honest opinion, the topic is interesting enough to attract the readers’ attention. The
methodology is accurate, and the data analysis supports the conclusions. Nevertheless, the
authors should clarify some points:
- The manuscript is well-organized, but certain sentences contain grammatical errors and
awkward phrasing. A professional language review or proofreading by a native English speaker
is strongly recommended.
- The manuscript states that eligibility criteria for the women treated with S&T had to be the same
as those treated with the three-step approach. Were there any differences in patient populations
that could introduce bias?
- The heterogeneity (I² value) is mentioned but not fully discussed. How does this affect the
robustness of the pooled estimates?
- The sensitivity analysis excluded the largest study (Loopik et al.), but what was the impact of
excluding smaller studies?
- The discussion should include an analysis of the potential complications associated with
surgical approaches.While the manuscript emphasizes overtreatment risk, it does not discuss
post-procedural complications such as Cervical stenosis, Increased risk of preterm birth, Post-
procedural infections ( PMID: 19640171; PMID: 37428263)
- The manuscript states that the S&T approach was associated with a reduction in negative
emotions compared to the three-step approach. However, psychological effects were measured
using different tools in the included studies (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory vs.
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Were the psychological effects assessed at similar time
points across studies?
Title: The overtreatment rate, medical cost and psychological affection of see-and-treat versus
three-step approaches in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review
and meta- analysis
Version: 1 Date: 24 Mar 2025
Reviewer:  Ebenezer Senu
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript could add knowledge to the scientific literature, however, some changes are
needed
In table 1, author was just indicated as eg Sadan? this is wrong and should state the surname of
first authors of the article and add et al. (eg Sadan et al.,). Also, abbreviations should be defined
as footnote.
I supposed because of low heterogeneity of included papers, that's why authors presented straight
on total pool for figure 1-4
I doubt there is any proper discussion in this manuscript. Authors just stated main findings
without discussion and proceeded to Strengths and limitations, authors should discuss their
findings. However, if they are assuming the interpretation of results as the discussion, that should
followed main findings as different paragraphs and that sub-heading removed, before proceeding
to Strengths and limitations.
Overall, this manuscript looks well written and few changes could warrant it publication.
Title: Cancer-related financial toxicity among Latinas with breast cancer in a rural area of the
United States: A qualitative study
Version: 1 Date: 10 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this interesting manuscript. The authors interviewed
Latina women diagnosed with breast cancer, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals at a
rural agricultural region in the US. Their findings paint a complex picture of a population heavily
impacted by the financial consequences of cancer treatment.
- This is somewhat unclear in table 2. Were there any participants who did not  experience any
worsening of their financial status? If so, was this explored in the interviews and how did these
patients with less financial consequences navigate their financial situation since their breast
cancer diagnosis?
- It’s interesting, though not unexpected in the study setting, that the majority of caregiver
participants were women. Both of the included quotes from male caregiver participants mostly
focused on employment. Were there any other findings related to the psychological and familial
impacts of financial toxicity as perceived by male caregiver participants?
- I think the findings on time toxicity and related transportation costs impacting financial toxicity
and job security for both patients and caregivers could be further discussed in the section on
practice implications. For example, interventions aimed at consolidating clinic visits or reducing
appointment burden could be particularly beneficial.
Title: Cancer-related financial toxicity among Latinas with breast cancer in a rural area of the
United States: A qualitative study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Feb 2025
Reviewer:  Andrea Anampa-Guzmán
Reviewer's report:
I think the financial toxicity among Latina breast cancer patients is an important topic. I
appreciate the focus on structural barriers. However, there are some changes needed:
• Selection bias is not well addressed since all patients in the study had insurance, this would
result in underestimating the chances of financial toxicity of uninsured Latina breast cancer
patients. This is especially important for first-generation immigrants from Latin America.
Please, address this limitation in the study.
• Address the cross-sectional nature of this study: While the discussion describes that financial
toxicity is an evolving process throughout cancer care, the study is based on single-timepoint
interviews.
• Discuss policy solutions in more depth. The manuscript mentions Medi-Cal expansion but fails
to critically analyze its effectiveness in reducing financial toxicity. See how it compares with
other state or national policies
• Strengthen the coherethe nce in structure of the discussion. For instance the flow from the
Effects of Financial Toxicity section transitions from psychosocial effects to basic needs)
abruptly
Title: Intimate partner violence and post-migration stressors reported by refugee women
accessing settlement services
Version: 2 Date: 06 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
Important study that extends our knowledge of refugees’ experiences with intimate partner
violence (IPV), through the assessment of an IPV intervention among women accessing
settlement services in Australia. Victims of IPV reported higher levels of psychological and
post-migration distress than non-victims, and most victims reported caseworkers responses
to be helpful. Study builds support for much-needed, specifically tailored IPV interventions,
particularly for populations that may face extensive barriers to accessing help. Suggested edits
below, primarily recommending that you further elaborate on some of your discussion points.
With these minor revisions, this work will contribute greatly to this field.
You are missing punctuation (particularly periods) throughout the manuscript (pages 10 & 11
and others)—please revise. You also have unnecessary commas throughout the paper (ex; pg
16: “In answer  to questions, about their experience”)
Sample size: “Bilingual” is confusing here—which 2 languages? Did your RA’s speak each of
the languages on this list? If so, please clarify.
Results:
I appreciate the thoroughness of your screens for IPV—allowing positive discosures to emerge
at any point in the interaction (even for those who did not disclose when first asked).
Typo on page 14, “serious psychological distress on the K6, with 11 10” (I’m assuming that it
should be either 10 or 11, but not 1,110)
Consider presenting results with percentages uniformly throughout this section.
Pg 15, first sentence under “Further associations” is a fragment—consider combining with
second sentence.
Responses to disclosure: One of the two participants who said the provider was “very unhelpful,”
is then quoted as saying, “It was very helpful.” Please clarify.
Pg 17, when reporting on the actions done by caseworkers, include percentages (keep format
consistent with previous sections where you present sample sizes and percentages).
Discussion:
Please consider adding a sentence or two to the section on concurrent abuse. You are building
up to a point there, but then you do not make it. Can you include any suggestions to explain the
difference between the rates seen in your population compared to a large representative study?
How might the experience of being a refugee impact this?
Can you please expand on the point you make on pg 19-20: “however discrimination is more
unexpected and suggests that those experiences of marginalization in society may contribute to
occurrence of IPV.” Consider fleshing the out or providing an example.
In your conclusion, you refer to them as “former” refugee women—Is this accurate? Do they
still identify as refugees? Also please revise for clarity the last sentence starting on page 22,
“Findings of high…”
Title: A comparative study of prone split-leg position and lithotomy position in posterior uterine
myomectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery
Version: 0 Date: 30 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
The idea of slipping patients into prone posititon  is interesting.
The authors should add figures and external  photos and also intraoperative pictures to better
understand the technique.
Regarding the strength and limitation of the technique, it should be mentioned?
The abdominal pressure maintanance is important in laparoscopy, how did the author achieved
an adequate pressure or abdominal expansion when the patient in in prone postition?
Instead of urology and general surgery literature please briefly mention about recent studies in
gynecology referring PMID: 34411729 PMID: 35073493 PMID: 32676283 PMID: 36445449
PMID: 36625926 PMID: 36018048
Title: A comparative study of prone split-leg position and lithotomy position in posterior uterine
myomectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery
Version: 0 Date: 27 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors
Methods
It is difficult to understand how randomisation was done in a retrospective study? Please clarify.
Results
Please elaborate on the VAS score. When was the VAS score measured?
Discussion
References are not in proper order.
Similar articles comparing lithotomy & prone leg split should be added.
1.Kumar P, Mishra TS, Sarthak S, Sasmal PK. Lithotomy versus prone position for perianal
surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Coloproctol. 2022 Apr;38(2):117-123. doi: 10.3393/
ac.2020.12.16. Epub 2021 Jun 7. PMID: 34098632; PMCID: PMC9021856.
Title: A comparative study of prone split-leg position and lithotomy position in posterior uterine
myomectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery
Version: 2 Date: 24 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Thanks for revising the article.
Please check the citations again.{ Yassa et al. [5] , Karakas et al. [6] ,Zhang et al. [7],Yassa et
al. [8] , Karakas et al. [9] Feng et al. [10] }
Please delete this statement from  the Abstract -"The prone split-leg position could help
significantly shorten the operation time when compared with the lithotomy position group, while
the prone split-leg position needs a longer operation preparation time.". This statement is a part
of conclusion not discussion.
Title: Exploring the Role of Cervicovaginal Microbiota as Risk Factor for Cervical Cancer in
Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Version: 1 Date: 04 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Petmore Zibako
Reviewer's report:
1. No need to put full names like Christian in the manuscript , you can us  initials like CM.
2. The first paragraph of the discussion should summarize your results. You can move that
information to background.
3. Risk factors like smoking and use of oral contraceptives cannot be affected by recall bias in
the context of your study.
4.Do not put results , recommendations and further studies in the conclusion. Conclusions should
stand alone ,it is your deduction from your major findings.
Title: Assessing the effect of hypertension on the severity of coronary artery lesions in young
female with acute coronary syndrome
Version: 1 Date: 20 Jun 2024
Reviewer's report:
It is interesting research. The article is technically correct. Data availability meets the expected
standards of our research community. The statements are discussed appropriately in the context
of previous literature sources. The authors refer to the results of recent studies.
I have a few questions:
1. It is proposed that the comparison of groups be supplemented by obesity and low-density
lipoprotein cholesterol, rather than overweight and total cholesterol.
2. There is no information about the duration of coronary heart disease.
3. It is not indicated what pharmacotherapy the patients took for arterial hypertension: groups
of drugs, monotherapy or a combination of 2 or 3 drugs.
4. It is also unclear exactly what treatment for coronary heart disease patients received after
hospital discharge due to PCI, since differences in treatment could have influenced MACE. It
is known that ACE inhibitors, sartans, and beta-blockers affect the prognosis of patients.
5. Comment on statistics. Were there any indicators with nonparametric distribution? If yes,
please, specify Me (Q25%; Q75%) and use the Mann-Whitney U test instead of the Student t-
test.
6. It is suggested that the manuscript may be accept after minor revision (corrections to minor
methodological errors and text editing).
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 2 Date: 14 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I find your article to be an interesting and insightful exploration of the factors influencing body
image disturbances among women diagnosed with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS). The
study delves into a significant area of research within reproductive medicine and psychology,
aiming to uncover the complex interplay of demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors
contributing to body image concerns in this population. While the article presents valuable
findings, there are a few points I would like to address to enhance the clarity and impact of the
manuscript.
Materials and methods:
Data collection:
Potential factors influencing body image:
The term "professional doctors" in the context provided seems redundant and unnecessary.
Instead, you could simply refer to them as "medical professionals" or specify their specialty if
relevant (e.g., endocrinologists, gynecologists).
Results:
The statistical methods used are appropriate for analyzing the data, including univariate analysis
and correlation analyses. However, providing effect sizes or measures of association (e.g., odds
ratios for the generalized linear model) would strengthen the interpretation of the findings.
Also, the results could benefit from greater precision in specifying certain variables, for example:
- The term "occupation" lacks specificity. It would be helpful to clarify which aspects of
occupation were related to body image disturbances in women with PCOS.
- Similarly, specifying the BMI range associated with body image issues would provide clarity.
For instance, was it women with higher or lower BMI who were more likely to experience body
image disturbances?
- The results mentions personal relationships and psychological resilience as independent
risk factors for body image issues. It would be beneficial mention what aspects of personal
relationships, family care and psychological resilience  were found as contributors to body image
disturbances in women with PCOS.
By providing more specific details about these factors, readers can better understand the nuances
of the study findings and their implications for clinical practice and future research.
Discussion:
Highlight the significance of the study's contribution to the literature by emphasizing the novelty
of using the Body Image Disturbance Questionnaire (BIDQ) to assess BID among women
with PCOS. Additionally, acknowledge the importance of identifying significant predictors of
BID, including BMI, hair loss, acne, hirsutism, intimate relationships, sleep, and psychological
resilience.
Provide clear recommendations for clinical practice based on the study findings. Discuss
strategies for healthcare professionals to address BID among women with PCOS.
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 16 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your revised manuscript. I am pleased to see that you have addressed the
recommendations provided in the previous review. Your revisions have significantly improved
the clarity and quality of the manuscript. The additional data and enhanced explanations have
strengthened the overall impact of your work. I appreciate your efforts and attention to detail
in making these revisions.
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 5 Date: 28 May 2024
Reviewer's report:
1. The participants in this study were married women diagnosed with PCOS who required
fertility assistance. Why choose this group? What are the serious consequences for this group of
people if a BID happens? It's not spelled out here, so this will affect the purpose and significance
of the whole study.
2. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of BID, but this point is not well represented
in the results section.
3. There are many variables in the article. Is there any guidance of theoretical framework?
4. The discussion part is still relatively shallow and fails to dig deep into the deep research
significance.
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 6 Date: 27 Jul 2024
Reviewer's report:
thank you for  your response.I have checked all the criticisms and answers, the authors of the
article have solved almost all the problems and ambiguities, and in general, many ambiguous
things about the working method of the connection of variables with each other and with ID
have been clarified.
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 6 Date: 08 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear author
I read your manuscript carefully. This version is well-edited according to the reviewer's
comments. In the abstract, it is better to write your manuscript's design in the methods section
and in the results, you should write that body image disturbance is associated with a higher BMI.
In addition, the necessity for performing this study does not convince me.
Good luck
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 6 Date: 09 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
Dear author,
Thanks for sending the manuscript.Here is my comments:
Abstract: please mention the type of study and number of participants in the method section( not
in result section)
Method: the exclusion criteria are ones occur during the study not before it. So all items you
mentioned as exclusion criteria should be revised, for example an exclusion criteria could be
incomplete filling of questionnaire. Also, please mention the number of participants and formula
of determining it in method section. Besides, the type of sampling should be mentioned.
Data collection: please mention a reference for the sections( from 2.2.1 to 2.2.7).
Discussion: please mention the strong of your research.
Title: Body Image Disturbances in women of childbearing age with Polycystic ovary syndrome:
a cross-sectional study
Version: 6 Date: 20 Aug 2024
Reviewer's report:
It is promising in terms of women's health that a problem such as PCOS, which is common
among women aged 15-49 years, is examined as a research in a different dimension. It is also
remarkable that a condition such as body image, in which gender comes to the fore and which
we think is affected by many factors, is integrated with a disease specific to women.   Since
body image disorders consist of data that are not normally distributed, it was seen that the
necessary tests were used to investigate correlations with other findings. However, different
factors affecting body image may occur in different populations. This would make generalisation
of the article difficult. Therefore, further studies are needed in different communities of women.
In addition, this issue should be expressed in the conclusion and discussion sections.
Title: Tumor size and stage assessment accuracy of MRI and ultrasound versus pathological
measurements in early breast cancer patients
Version: 1 Date: 31 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Well written and interesting paper.
I mentioned above just few corrections that need to done in my opinion.
Only a comment regarding the MRI examination: It is mentioned that you use the delayed phase
for the measurements and not the early phases. Is that correct or a grammar mistake?
Title: Tumor size and stage assessment accuracy of MRI and ultrasound versus pathological
measurements in early breast cancer patients
Version: 3 Date: 09 Mar 2025
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: Yes, the authors have adequately responded to all my comments and
questions. They have also made the necessary changes in the actual manuscript to reflect their
responses and improve the paper. I believe the manuscript has improved and is in a better shape
for publication.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Thank you for responding to all my comments and questions.