JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: The Effect of Empowerment Program to Reduce Sugar Consumption Based on the Multi-
Theory Model on Body Mass Index and Abdominal Obesity in Iranian Women
Version: 1 Date: 30 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for providing this opportunity for me to review this manuscript. Please see my
comments as follows:
Abstract:
1. Please write each word in full for the first time and then use its abbreviation e.g. MTM.
2. Results: please report results in a numerical method.
Introduction
1. Please revise the objective of the study at the end of introduction.
Methods
1. What authors mean about 3 people were removed due to absence for more than two sessions
and 4 people due to COVID-19? Did they drop from the study? If so, please correct it.
2. those criteria that authors mentioned for exclusion criteria, actually are drop-out and not
exclusion criteria.
3. It is not clear that authors what did with the descriptive part of the study? Was it screening
for choosing eligible women?
4. Please prepare the method section with more detail about who conducted the data
collection? who and how measured weight and height and waist circumference? who completed
questionnaires? Any randomization? what the reason for naming this study quasi-experimental
and not randomized controlled trial?
5. What was the physical activity of participants?
Results
1. table 3: reporting Income of participants in a country such as Iran that the poverty line is not
clear, may cannot provide exact reflection of economic status of participants.
2. Instead, it would be better that authors asked participants about how they rate their economic
status.
3. what do mean about laboratory findings?
4. In my opinion, authors should use other statistical tests such as “GEE” for measuring the
interaction of time and intervention.
5. All tables, please provide unit for each variable such as BMI.
6. Why authors did not report weight?
7. What is the basis for consumption of sugar, and other sweet substances? For instance daily
or weekly?
Discussion
1. Please write the objective of the study at the beginning of discussion.
2. What were the limitations of the study?
3. One of the limitations of this study is “recruiting women with age range 30-60” means
that some women were postmenopausal and they deprived from estrogen and their waist
circumference increased because of hormones and not consumption of sugary substance.
Title: The Effect of Empowerment Program to Reduce Sugar Consumption Based on the Multi-
Theory Model on Body Mass Index and Abdominal Obesity in Iranian Women
Version: 1 Date: 14 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Your article is valuable, but it doesn't have novelty. Convince me and the readers about the
novelty
1-write the full name of abbreviations in first use such as BMI or MTM-
2-Where is Joven? Please write the complete location in first use in abstract....Province,
country .....
3-What is your mean " After a descriptive study"???? The abstract should be brief but clear.
4-Please choose your keywords based on MeSH
Introduction:
1-Please check the consequence between paragraph, it seems that there is no consequence
between paragraphs.
2-What is your study gap knowledge?? For example, was there a contradiction?
Or do you have studies that show the superiority of this theory compared to other theories?
3-In introduction you should mention the summery of similar articles to show the gap
Methods:
It is better to divide the methods into several parts
1 -Please chart your diagram of your sampling
2- descriptive section?? What is your mean?
3- you should write inclusion and exclusion criteria before the cause of excluding
4-People with COVID-19  when excluded? At the beginning of your study or during the
sessions?
5- “not completing the informed written consent form for voluntary participation in the study
“ is not excluding criteria
Because these samples are not included in the study at all. In fact this item(not completing the
informed written consent form for voluntary participation in the study” should considered as a
inclusion criteria
“lactation, premature menopause, infertility, underlying disease (thyroid, depression, diabetes,
cardiovascular disease, osteoarthritis), taking hormonal medications” : these itmes also are not
exclusion criteria
You should considered these as a inclusion criteria such as not lactation, not taking hormonal
medications , ....
But infection or suspicion of Covid 19 are excluding criteria
6- SPSS-16 OR 17????
Results:
1-The number of tables is too high and confusing
Result section is very vague\
2-Please remove the duplicate content of the table and text and reducing the number of tables
3-in table 3 : what is your mean about Pt2,4c , .......?
Please write a comprehensive conclusion, not repeating the findings
Discussion: good
Title: Women leaders perceived barriers and consequences of safe abortion in Rwanda: A
qualitative Study
Version: 12 Date: 22 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer 2 Feedback
Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide constructive feedback for this important
manuscript by Rugema, et al. Thank you to the co-authors for attending to the comments
made in the previous review. Comments were sufficiently adapted, except for a few additional
suggestions I have made below. Please see below in red.
Page 5, Lines 25-29: The wording is still lacking palatable impact, in my opinion. A suggestion
for stating the active aims of the study:
The purpose of this study was to explore the empowered perspectives of women leaders in
Rwanda about the recent policy change for safe abortion given their purported influence of other
women and female adolescents. The study identifies women leaders’ perceived barriers and their
attitudes about resulting consequences toward safe abortion, which helps provide insights into
their alignment with the new law as well as their willingness to support and advocate for it.
Consider, if this suggestion is adopted, slightly modifying the corresponding Aims statement in
the Abstract, Page 2, Lines 6-7.
Page 16, Discussion, Lines 26-30 and Page 17, Lines 1-3 could read as (reviewer’s suggestion
integrated into co-authors’ comments):
It is evident from our findings that, where abortion is concerned, women leaders in Rwanda
contend with similar provocations associated with the power dynamics and power relations as
those found across Sub-Saharan Africa. Mistrust between genders, as well as with healthcare
providers, in relation to abortion, is supported by a context of male superiority, which denies
the subject of abortion for public, political, and medical professional discourse, and ignites the
morality attitudes against safe abortion (35,36). This antagonistic context is critical to understand
as problematic among some women leaders in relation to the promotion of programmatic
intervention for safe abortion across Sub- Saharan Africa (36). Effective strategies aimed at
increasing women's access to safe abortion services, as well as working to shift the power
dynamics, are both promoted and required to achieve better public health outcomes. However,
and as our findings strongly suggest for Rwanda, the attitudes and perspectives of women
leaders are yet to become aligned with these initiatives. Yet, understanding their voices takes an
important first step towards acknowledging powerful and politically impactful barriers to safe
abortion services for all childbearing-aged females in the country.
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 2 Date: 22 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
1. Population
# All women who attended ANC at ARTH during the study period were included in the study,
which is small segments of population.
2. Sample size and sampling procedures
# What is your K value so as to use a systematic sampling method (page 6 line 128). It should
be well described.
3. Operational definitions
# Your operational definition for cervical cancer screening utilization is within 3 years but your
factor analysis is based on undergone screening for CC in their lifetime. Which make difficult to
produce any analysis and result in case of your study. Therefore, such inconsistency should be
avoided. It is better to operationalize your dependent variable as “proportion of eligible women
to be screened within a population who have been screened within 5 years for cervical cancer”
4. Independent variables
# You mentioned a factor called preparedness on health system-related factors. Did you measure
it? I think, it needs observation checklist. So, elaborate it.
5. Data collection procedures (instruments, personnel, measurements)
# You have used only two articles to adapt your questionnaire, i.e. 49 & 50. Do you believe
these number of articles are enough to prepare your tool and does similar study has not been
done at Oromia?
6. Result
# Table 1. you have used numbers (1-4) as a code but you had explained using a, b, c & d, which
is inconsistent.
# Figure 2 & 3: is not clear, it lacks title of horizontal and vertical axis, so it needs modification.
# You said “Health system-related factors affecting cervical cancer screening utilization”. Do
you believe they are factors or “Assessment of  health system-related characteristics ”. Revise it.
7. Discussion
# Your discussion is poor and not well written even you have not used recent evidences from
nearby places, countries like countries found in East Africa (Kenya, Uganda etc.).
# You said “observational study design (cross-sectional)”, better to say simply “Crossectional”
8. Conclusion
# Can we say “We found the magnitude of CCS utilization among ANC mothers was low”
without any preference. It should be modified.
Minor comments
1. Abstract
# The word “predictors” on page 3 and line 46 is not appropriate for your study design type.
2. Result
# On table 6, you mentioned only hospital for the question “Where were you screened for CC?”,
CCS service can also provide in different settings like private, health centers etc.
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 2 Date: 24 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Giorgio Bogani
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the Manuscript titled "Cervical cancer screening utilization and
associated factors among women attending Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching
Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia" which falls within the aim of the Journal.
Indeed, the topic is of the utmost importance given the efforts made by the WHO for the
prevention and early diagnosis of cervical cancer and precancerous cervical lesions.
Methodology is accurate and conclusions are supported by the data analysis. Nevertheless,
authors should clarify some point and improve the discussion citing relevant and novel key
articles about the topic.
- The whole text should be corrected by a native English speaker in order to make the work
clearer and more readable.
-Typos errors should be corrected.
-The introduction should be extended and completed. I find interesting a reference to the effects
treatments for the management of precancerous lesions on obstetrical outcomes (see PMID:
33140628)
- The authors have not adequately highlighted the strengths and limitations of their study. I
suggest better specifying these points.
- Discussions can be expanded and improved by citing relevant articles (I suggest authors to
read and insert in references the following article PMID: 29458794).
Considered all these points, I think it could be of interest for the readers and, in my opinion, it
deserves the priority to be published after minor revisions.
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 2 Date: 25 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Tullio Golia D'auge
Reviewer's report:
In my opinion, this topic analyzed is interesting enough to attract readers’ attention. The goal
of this cross-sectional study is the analysis of cervical cancer screening utilization in Antenatal
Care at Asella referral and teaching hospital, Arsi Zone, southeastern Ethiopia.
In my opinion the abstract of this article is not very clear and a bit confusing.
An extensive correction of the English language is necessary in order to make the work clearer
and more readable.
Also, could be useful the evaluation of the actual state of the art of screening of cervical cancer .
In fact, for example I suggest these articles to get deeper in the topic: PMID 35455328 and
PMID 36141217.
In my opinion, the discussion could be for these reasons studied in deep and extended.
Because of these reasons, the article should be revised and completed. Considered all this points,
I think it could be of interest for the readers and, in my opinion, it deserves the priority to be
published after minor revisions.
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 4 Date: 24 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Tullio Golia D'auge
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors, thank you for sending me the corrected manuscript.
I read your work with great interest and pleasure. The work with the changes made after my
advices and those of the other reviewers is complete and, in my opinion, ready for publication.
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 4 Date: 27 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Giorgio Bogani
Reviewer's report:
I wanted to thank the authors for making the requested changes and thus broadening and
clarifying the discussion. I also thank them for correcting the English and rephrasing the abstract.
Thanks to these modifications the article is much more flowing and clearer and that's why it is
deserves the priority to be published
Title: Cervical cancer screening utilization and associated factors among women attending
Antenatal Care at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Arsi zone, South Ethiopia
Version: 4 Date: 28 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Overall, the response given by the authors is good. However, I still have some questions that
need clarification. They said, "We prepared an observation checklist for some of
the health system-related factors that affect the utilization of CCS. However, based on reviewer
1, we removed this section from the manuscript". I think the manuscript is sent to reviewer 1
and to me at the same time. since I have not given a review after reviewer 1. Better to revise
it accordingly.
Title: Sexual violence against women remains problematic and highly prevalent around the
world
Version: 1 Date: 16 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
Thank you very much for submitting the study entitled as
Sexual violence against women remains problematic and highly prevalent around the world
For peer reviewing to me.
I have read the article very carefully as the author used a hierarchical approach in proving his
primary aim of the study by including 32 cross sectional studies to evaluate the sexual abuse of
women in large number of countries and continents throughout the world by metanalysis.
Since the revolutionary role of women in the 20th as well as 21 century has changed dramatically
all over the world so women nowadays are more involved in military, aviation, education,
security and other hard jobs, yet they are still subject to sexual harassment all over the world.
I have compared the prevalence reported by the author in his study with 3 software and found
to be correct. Those software are medcalc, statdirect as well as NCSS. However I was not able
to verify the random- fixed effect model by the I squared statistics as I don't have the individual
study.
I brief I accept the results of the author based on community observation to sexual abuse from all
resources all over the world. Accordingly, I recommend this study for publishing as its results
are fairly correct.
Thank you very much
Wisam Akram
Consutant & assistant professor
Gynecology and Obstetrics
Mustansiriyah Medical College
Title: Sexual violence against women remains problematic and highly prevalent around the
world
Version: 1 Date: 24 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Theresa Azonima Irinyenikan
Reviewer's report:
The Authors tried by doing a systematic review to bring to light the prevalence of sexually
globally which is commendable. However, I have the following comments:
1. The topic should be rephrased to give the readers a clearer picture of what the study is all about.
2. Line 27 can be changed to search instead of to examine
3.Line 34 should be corrected to a higher rate
4. Lines 90-92 should be rephrased
5.Line 106 can be corrected to : the data were compared by two separate researchers
6. Line 107: delete to
7. The Authors should re-write lines 116 & 117 to make it clearer
8.Line 124-delete to and correct as estimate
9. Line 127-correct as estimated
10. Line 129-correct as used
11. Line 130-correct as to show
12. Line 131-correct as used
13. Line 139-correct as is illustrated in the study selection process
14.Line 149: respectively
15. Line 151- correct as the median of the sample size was 921 and the interquartile range was
361-2,000
16. Line 152- correct as the total number of cases was 74,165.The quality scores of the studies
ranged from 4 to 9 and the median score was 7.7
17. Line 157: correct as basically
18. Line 167: correct as than those whose data were obtained
19. Line 170: correct as showed that the survey
20.Line 200: correct as showed
21. Line 204: correct as indicates
22. Line218: correct as to remember
23. Line 233: correct as relatives delete the second 's'
Title: Sexual violence against women remains problematic and highly prevalent around the
world
Version: 4 Date: 23 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear colleagues
The response of the author shows that he has a deep insight both into women' life as well as
scientific methods to verify his primary assumption put as aim of the study.
I acknowledge deeply your kind referral of this article as well as the author response. On personal
ground I believe that publishing this article will raise the score Journal greatly as well as making
it as one of the most reputable and creditable one among others.
Accordingly I support greatly my approval to publishing this paper hoping best for you and the
author, always
Wisam Akram
Consultant & assistant Professor
Gynecology & Obstetrics
Mustansiriyah Medical Journal
F.I.C.O.G.
Title: Disparities and Barriers of Health Facility Delivery Following Optimal and Suboptimal
Pregnancy Care in Nigeria: evidence of home births in cross-sectional surveys
Version: 0 Date: 18 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
General comment: This topic is topical and of great public health importance. Home delivery has
been a great challenge in LMIC like Nigeria. To investigate the disparity and barriers to health
facility delivery and also to determine the predictors of home delivery will be of beneficial in
curbing the problem which contributes to the unacceptable high rate of maternal mortality in
Nigeria.
1. The method section in the abstract should at least include study design and the process of data
abstraction from the NDHS.
2. Sexual and reproductive health care is a broad area to mention in the introduction since the
topic is focused on pregnancy care and place of delivery.
3. The introduction should include literature on antenatal care and the uptake of antenatal care in
Nigeria. Kindly include an explanation on what optimal and suboptimal pregnancy care means.
4. The description of the sampling technique in the method section appears to be three and not
two as stated. The first was the selection of the local government areas, the second was the
selection of rural and urban enumeration areas and the selection of households should have been
the third.
5. The description of how data was extracted from the data base should also be provided.
6. Under measurement in the method section, the age should be age group as presented.
7. It is not clear how wealth was assessed and classified into: poorest, poorer, average, richer,
richest.
8. In the tables of results, include the total for each of the variables especially if the numbers
are not the same for the variables.
9. Neither the proportions in the row nor those of the column adds up to 100, it therefore makes
it confusing and difficult to understand.
10. You don’t begin a sentence with figures as seen in results section of the bivariate analysis
reporting.
11. The presentation of the results is not too clear, be more precise in reporting the findings and
make it easier for readers to understand. Also categorize the findings for clarity (based on: age,
geographical location, educational status, wealth etc).
12. In the discussion section, could you say what other studies found when you say it agrees
with your findings?
13. Some clarity is required where you tried to compare home birth across the geopolitical zones
because it is all mixed up.
14. The study was focused on antenatal care and institutional or home delivery but you keep
using sexual and reproductive health which is a broad area and beyond the scope of this study.
For example, your conclusion says the study findings exposed the insufficiency of ANC alone in
improving overall reproductive health outcomes whereas you only looked at place of delivery.
15. The manuscript will benefit from editing and proof reading. There are grammatical and
spelling errors.
Title: Disparities and Barriers of Health Facility Delivery Following Optimal and Suboptimal
Pregnancy Care in Nigeria: evidence of home births in cross-sectional surveys
Version: 0 Date: 26 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Obasanjo Afolabi Bolarinwa
Reviewer's report:
Title
Disparities and Barriers of Health Facility Delivery Following Optimal and Suboptimal
Pregnancy Care in Nigeria: evidence of home births in cross-sectional surveys
• Change pregnancy care to antenatal care
• Remove the evidence of home births in cross-sectional surveys
Abstract
• Change “Women” to women throughout the abstract and manuscript
• Note the difference between disparities and inequalities
• Reduce your keywords to 5
• Move this statement “Older maternal age, SBA use, joint health decision making and ANC
in a health facility are associated with facility delivery. About 75.6% of health facility barriers
are due to high cost, long distance, poor service, and misconceptions. Women with any form
of obstacle utilizing health facility are less likely to receive ANC in a health facility” to the
paragraph like before reporting of the “AOR” results
Introduction
• State the specific targets of SDG
• Note when to use SDG or SDGs
• This introduction will benefit more from a grammatical review
• Change investigate to examine
• Leave inequalities out of your study because you didn’t look at that
Method
• Change the heading to Methods and Materials
• Argue why NDHS data from 2008 to 2018 could contribute to knowledge despite the year gap
• Discuss why the study is important in Nigeria and in relation to the unique method you are
bringing on board.
Results
• Reduce your interpretation of important findings
• Change AOR and COR to aOR and cOR also in the abstract
• Change effect to impact throughout the manuscript
Discussion
• Change investigation to examine throughout the manuscript
• Remove surprising
• Discuss the study's objective, followed by results immediately, remove from “this is to inform
best practice…………………..”
• Do not report statistical notations like p-value in your discussion
• Use appropriate journal c=in-text citations throughout the manuscript
• Reduce your discussion to important findings and wrap it up to make it concise
• This section will benefit greatly from a grammatical review
Others
• Include another section heading “research and policy implications” or “Implication for research
and policy.”