Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Perspe ctives on the psychological and emotional burden  of having gestational diabetes 
amongst low -income w omen in Cape Town, South Africa  
 
Version: 1 Date: 02 Sep 2020  
Reviewer's report:  
 
Authors responded to all comments very well. The content are now much more coherent in this 
revised manuscript.  
However, I would suggest to include following quantitative studies to support the debate in 
introduction  as well as for explanation written in discussion.    
 
A. Emotional distress happened among GDM, please cite following articles  
1. Prevalence and factors associated with depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms among 
women with gestational diabetes mellitu s in tertiary care centres in Malaysia: a cross -sectional 
study. BMC  
    pregnancy and childbirth, 19(1), 367.  
2. Prevalence of anxiety among gestational diabetes mellitus patients: A systematic review and 
meta -analysis. World Journal of Meta -Analysis, 8(3), 275 -284. 
3. Diabetes in pregnancy and risk of antepartum depression: a systematic review and meta -
analysis o f cohort studies. International journal of environmental research and public health, 
17(11), 3767.  
4. Anxiety and depression on gestational diabetes mellitus in early pregnancy. Wei sheng yan 
jiu= Journal of hygiene research, 49(2), 179 -184. 
5. Impact of g estational diabetes diagnosis on concurrent depression in pregnancy. Journal of 
Psychosomatic Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology, 1 -4 
 
 
B. Poor quality of Life among GDM women, please cite following articles  
 
1. Factors associated with poor ‑to‑moderate quality o f life among pregnant women with 
gestational diabetes mellitus: a cross ‑sectional study in Malaysia. Studies, 31, 33.  
2. Impacts of gestational diabetes on quality of life in Chinese pregnant women in urban Tianjin, 
China. Primary Care Diabetes.  
3. Factors  affecting the quality of life in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a path 
analysis model. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18(1), 1 -9. 
 
C. Care provided to GDM women, please cite following articles  
 
1. A Clinical Audit of the Process of Care for Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in a 
Malaysian Public Polyclinic.  
2. Antenatal models of care for women with gestational diabetes mellitus: Vignettes from an 
international meeting. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecolo gy. 
3. Effectiveness of telemedicine for pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus: an 
updated meta -analysis of 32 randomized controlled trials with trial sequenti al analysis. BMC 
pregnan cy and childbirth, 20, 1 -14. 
 
 
 
Publons Reviewer Recognition . Springer Nature can send verifica tion of this review directly to 
Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Ana lytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, 
please click on the “Yes” option below. Your name, email  address, title of the reviewed 
manuscript, name of the journal, and date of your review submission (the “Review Data ”) will 
then be trans mitted to Publons upon publication of the manuscript.  If you have already registered 
at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile as per your 
settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons, you w ill receive an email from 
them asking you to register in order for them to be able to re cognize your review on your new 
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivat ive metadata for the benefit of 
Publons and you as a reviewer, carefull y considering the sensi tivity of such information. For 
example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updatin g your profile published on its 
webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate reviewers.  
 
Pleas e find the details of processing in Publons ’ privacy policy https://publons.com/about/terms  
 
Yes 
 
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, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly 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 an y 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  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  
 
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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 ) if this 
manuscript is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the 
published report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be 
published.  If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the edi torial office 
before completing the review.  If you wish, you can include your name in your pu blish ed report.  
 
Please note you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and  confirm 
this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to 
publish your name.  
 
I agree to the terms of the CC -BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report. 
(default)  
 
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (i ncluding the use of appropriate 
controls), and are the conclusions supported by the evidence presented?  
 
Yes 
 
Are the meth ods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?  
 
Yes 
 
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?  
 
Yes 
 
Is the presentation of the work clear?  
 
Yes 
 
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blot s) free from apparent 
manipulation?  
 
Yes