JerMa88/BMC_Womens_Health_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Title: Uptake of prevention of mother-to-child transmission cascade services in Burkina Faso
between 2013 and 2020: are we on the right track?
Version: 2 Date: 22 Nov 2022
Reviewer:  Abdulmuminu Isah
Reviewer's report:
The authors have contributed significantly to the body of knowledge about PMTCT in Burkina
Faso. The depth of the science  is strong and the language is appropriate. The comments below
will improve the  manuscript:
Abstract: (Third line under Results 'with one and six regions': Poor grammar. If you mean that
only one region met the national target and six regions met the international target, state it in
plain and better words. Also, the result does not show any relevance if the reader does not know
the total number of regions covered by the study); the same poor grammar is in the ninth line
in the same results 'as well nationally as regionally'.
Background:  Lines 5-9: This sentence would be better if separated into two: one about the
mother and the other about the infant.
Discussion: You do not rehearse results in the discussion section. The only aspect of the results
that should appear here is a summary of the key study findings which is to be done without
mentioning values such as frequencies, percentages or p values
Title: Uptake of prevention of mother-to-child transmission cascade services in Burkina Faso
between 2013 and 2020: are we on the right track?
Version: 5 Date: 10 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
Golablly, my comments have been taken into account.
Nethertheless, minor corrections are necessary:
Comment 1: Please correct Burkina-Faso by Burkina Faso in Introdution section
Comment 2: Please revise the objective of the study in the abstract section: there is "assess" two
times. The same formulation of the objective in the introduction can be put in the abstract.
Title: Impact of (Recurrent) Bacterial Vaginosis on Quality of Life and the Need for Accessible
Alternative Treatments
Version: 1 Date: 10 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
“216 – 217 This study aims to evaluate which treatment options were the most effective and
participants’ preferences for clinical management of (recurrent) BV.”
No information was given about non antibiotic treatment option as probiotic oral therapy.
“210 – 216 Using metronidazole as the first line of treatment as a monotherapy may be
insufficient for treatment of recurrent BV as its restoration of healthy vaginal flora is likely only
temporary. In a previous study that analyzed the microbiome of 63 women (17 patients with
recurrent BV compared to 46 healthy controls), Lactobacilli was less abundant in women with
recurrent BV.17 After one week of oral metronidazole treatment, their vaginal microbiomes
had an increase in Lactobacilli. However, these changes were not sustained one month after
treatment.”
This statement should be followed by a further explanation on the outcomes of other therapeutic
strategy. Taking as an example the probiotic oral therapy, it was stated in previous studies
that women treated with an association of antibiotic and probiotic supplementation have fewer
percentage of recurrence. Furthermore, it was stated that this type of therapeutic regimen led to
an improvement of vaginal flora composition with a restoration of normal vaginal microflora in
long term. This had a strong impact on the reduction of local symptoms with a faster resumption
of a normal lifestyle. [doi: 10.1186/s12978-022-01449-z] [doi: 10.3390/healthcare9111555.]
“225 -226 Negative impact on overall quality of life, sexual health, or mental health
corresponded to trying probiotics.”
This statement could be misleading as no information was given on the type of therapy used
(if oral vs vaginal probiotic, supplementation or probiotic only therapeutic regimen). A further
examination of the probiotic therapeutic regimen used is essential to better understand the
success or failure of the therapy.
Title: Impact of (Recurrent) Bacterial Vaginosis on Quality of Life and the Need for Accessible
Alternative Treatments
Version: 3 Date: 10 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  António Machado
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for answering all my comments and questions. Congratulations on the study! It was
an honor and pleasure to read your recent research. I already endorsed the publication of the
revised manuscript.
Some minor observations:
Table 2 – In the revised manuscript the authors changed the column “Has used lactobacillus
probiotic”, but the name of the genus Lactobacillus should be maintained with a capital L.
To finish, I recommend replacing “microflora” (in lines 104 and 114 of the revised manuscript)
with “microbiota” due to the fact the term microflora has been replaced in the last decade by
microbiota. However, It is not mandatory and only a suggestion if the authors agree.
Title: Socio-economic variations of Breast Cancer treatment and Discontinuation: A study from
a public tertiary cancer hospital in Mumbai, India
Version: 1 Date: 24 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Authors of the study “Socio-economic variations of Breast Cancer treatment and
Discontinuation: A study from a public tertiary cancer hospital in Mumbai, India” is worth
publication. Overall findings are noteworthy. I have limited comments top make
The study found that 71 (14%) patients with breast cancer discontinued treatment. Of them,
24/71 (33%) actually discontinued due to financial reasons. However, authors have mentioned
it as 4.8% (24/500) due to financial reasons. I think this (33%) calculation makes more sense
in understanding the discontinuation of treatment for financial reasons. Else, 4.8% of overall
cohort will be under estimating the root problem of socio-economic situation. Please mention
patients with breast cancer instead of breast cancer patients throughout the manuscript.
Title: Socio-economic variations of Breast Cancer treatment and Discontinuation: A study from
a public tertiary cancer hospital in Mumbai, India
Version: 1 Date: 26 Dec 2022
Reviewer's report:
The author should mention the actual number of patients attending the Hospital for all cancers
and how many of them are breast cancer (June 2019 and July 2021.) and how they have selected
the 500 breast cancer cases.
Sampling design should be mentioned for the selection of 500 breast cancer.
In the materials & method section, it is written that primary data was collected between June
2019 and July 2021 while in the Sample collection it mentioned the period for June 2019 to
March 2022, Kindly clarify.
Title: Socio-economic variations of Breast Cancer treatment and Discontinuation: A study from
a public tertiary cancer hospital in Mumbai, India
Version: 1 Date: 05 Feb 2023
Reviewer:  Somdatta Patra
Reviewer's report:
The research article examines a important and interesting research question which has public
health policy implications, if there is any socioeconomic variation in breast cancer treatment
discontinuation. However, the following points were noted while reviewing the paper:
1. Abstract: Conclusion: The authors conclude that expanding breast cancer treatment in small
cities may reduce discontinuation of treatment. This was not based on study results: patients from
rural area had a higher rate of discontinuation but the difference was not statistically significant
as the 95% CI was 0.42-1.50
2. Results: Table 1 & 2: Columns depicting number and percentages. The first column may be
of “number” followed by “percentage”
3. Table 2 is lengthy and does not contribute to any new information. Same data is presented in
Table 3. The reasons for discontinuation may be presented in text.
4. Figure 1 is not required.
5. The information provided in figure 2 may be best presented in a flow chart.
Title: Adherence to oral anticancer hormonal therapy in breast cancer patients and its
relationship with treatment satisfaction: an important insight from a developing country
Version: 1 Date: 22 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
Thank you for the diligent attempt to improve on the manuscript.
However, as previously mentioned the use of Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS) is
a major flaw in the study design.
Although you have attempted to defend the use by including more citations, I like to highlight
that with the exception of one citation by Toivonen et al, the other citations are inappropriate
Mercadante et al as previously mentioned is on adherence to pain management which is not
relevant to your study
Spoelstra et al uses a MARS that involves a 5-item scale, which is clearly different from the
scale mentioned in your study
Similarly, Timmers et al uses the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS) that is also a 5-
item scale different from your study.
Medication Adherence Rating Scale was intended for psychoses, a condition that is
symptomatic, and the drug prescribed is intended to reduce the symptoms over time. This is
totally unlike breast cancer where the endocrine therapy is not expected to reduce any symptoms.
The scale includes  the following questions
1. Do you ever forget to take your medicine?
2. Are you careless at times about taking your medicine?
3. When you feel better, do you sometimes stop taking your medicine?
4. Sometimes if you feel worse when you take your medicine, do you stop taking it?
5. I take my medication when I am sick
6. It is unnatural for my mind and body to be controlled by medication
7. My thoughts are clearer on medication
8. By staying on medication I can prevent getting sick
9. I feel weird, like a 'zombie', on medication
10. Medication makes me feel tired and sluggish
Although the first 4 are definitely relevant, the subsequent questions may not be relevant.
Qn 5 applies to patient on medication that can reduce the symptoms
Qn 6 is negotiable
Qn 7 is not relevant at all for endocrine therapy, and even Toivonen et al excluded this question
if you read the paper carefully
Qn 8 can be relevant
Qn 9 is relevant to psychiatric med and is not relevant in your study
Qn 10 can be relevant given fatigue is a side effect
So minimally you will need to exclude Qn 5,7 and 9 if you would like to proceed with the
publication. This would mean your questionnaire is not validated but that can be a limitation
in your discussion
Otherwise I would recommend the paper be rejected as the paper is fundamentally talking about
adherence, but the adherence measure is not appropriate for your study population
Thanks.
Title: Characteristics of submucosal leiomyomas that could cause severe hemorrhage with
relugolix: An observational study
Version: 3 Date: 21 Oct 2022
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript is about use of relugolix in submucosal myoma patients. The study is
interesting; however, some points should be made clearer before publication.
Major points:
1. I thought this manuscript has not been checked by native English user. Some phrases are not
natural. Relugolix should be ”relugolix” with small r in the title and the text.
2. It was not clear how the protrusion rate was calculated. Either MR or ultrasound? With
multiple myoma, only the maximum tumor was measured, but how about the submucosal
myoma size? Was the leiomyoma size reduction also calculated with the maximum myoma?
3. Was the FIGO classification checked by ultrasound? State this more clearly in the methods.
(I personally find it difficult to calculate the protrusion rate or decide FIGO classification by
ultrasound only.)
4. The authors say that the did not think patient 1 had submucosal leiomyoma, then how was it
possible to say it was FIGO 0 before treatment? The tumor may have protruded after treatment
administration.
The overall manuscript has to be reviewed again after the major points has been answered.
Title: Characteristics of submucosal leiomyomas that could cause severe hemorrhage with
relugolix: An observational study
Version: 3 Date: 06 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting study focused on personalized treatment option of fibroids by Relugolix.
Although patient numbers were small, the results indicate that Relugolix could use safely for
Figo Type 1 and Type 2 fibroids.
Minor comments are listed below.
In the abstract, please mention Relugolix dose and treatment duration in the method section.
Please also include what type of symptoms were improved by Relugolix treatment for Figo Type
1 and Type 2 fibroids, in results section.
In results, discussion, and conclusion sections, please include more details about the symptoms
improvement and fibroid size reduction by Relugolix treatment for Figo Type 1 and Type 2
fibroids.
Page 6, lines 1-2, please rearrange the sentence.
Title: Characteristics of submucosal leiomyomas that could cause severe hemorrhage with
relugolix: An observational study
Version: 4 Date: 30 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to all comments. However, further editing is needed before
publication. These are only minor points.
1. The authors better state they preferably used MR before ultrasound to calculate protrusion
rate and to decide FIGO classification in the methods.
2. These lines are better rewritten in more scientific terms. Reduced should be reduces. Brittle
is not usually used with soft tissue. Rubbed against maybe better as touch or gets in contact with
or else. Of course is not needed. I don’t personally use bled in scientific writings. “Relugolix
reduced the estradiol level within three days [6]. This decrease may make the leiomyoma and
its stalk brittle and more prone to bleeding. Thus, patient 2 may have bled because the brittle
surface of the leiomyoma rubbed against the vaginal wall. Of course, these two patients could
have developed severe hemorrhage without using relugolix. However, we consider that relugolix
increases the possibility of prolapsing and bleeding of submucosal leiomyomas of FIGO type
0 for the above reasons.”
3. MRI should been conducted… should be “should have been”.
4. The title, aim, and conclusion do not correspond. Rewrite the abstract and the main text in
a better corresponding manner.
Title: Characteristics of submucosal leiomyomas that could cause severe hemorrhage with
relugolix: An observational study
Version: 5 Date: 22 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
I think the authors have answered all of the reviewer's points.
The title may be better as "Characteristics of submucosal leiomyomas that caused severe
hemorrhage with relugolix: An observational study", as this is an retrospective study.
Title: Development of a brief menstrual quality of life measure for women with heavy menstrual
bleeding
Version: 2 Date: 22 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for your attention to this important topic in development and validation of tool
especially in the field of women health. Studies in the field of design questionnaires are valuable
and practical.
Title
- The word "impact" is used in the title, and in the rest of the aim (purpose and method …), while
no intervention was performed in this study and the relationship between these two variables
(heavy menstrual bleeding and quality of life) was measured.
- Abbreviations are usually not used in the title (PERIOD-QOL), it is better to write it in full.
Abstract
- Make the abstract shorter, especially the background section. The maximum number of words
in the abstract should be 250 words.
Introduction
- The main goal of this study was to development and psychometrically of the quality of life
tool in women with heavy bleeding; however it was not mentioned in the introduction. Is there
similar tool related to this issue? Also, what is the point of this study? Be written.
- Write the study gap
Method
- In the process of tool development, the items pool is designed from a literature review or sample
interviews or both. Which method did the researchers use for the design? Did they use only 39-
item PERIOD-QOL questionnaire to form items pool?  )To create items for the PERIOD-QOL
we developed a pool of 39 items(.
- In the method of this study, it is not clearly stated how the validity of the tool is performed?
For example, "face validity, content validity (CVI, CVR) and construct validity. And the results
of this validity are not reported in the results section.
- Did experts evaluate the validity of the tool? Or just samples
- It seems that the method of this study is more about design short form of 39-item tool of
PERIOD-QOL than designing a new tool.
-  In the page 13: Validation of the PERIOD-QOL.  Researchers' state that were done a
study of quasi-experimental independent samples design (The study was of quasi-experimental
independent samples design), But they did not intervention in the study.
-
Discussion
The study was discussed in relation to the quality of life of women with and without heavy
menstrual bleeding and women with and without diagnosis of a gynecological condition. While
the title and purpose of the study was design and psychometric of the PERIOD-QOL tool and
should be discussed in connection with this issue.
The purpose of your study was to design and validity a tool, so the conclusion, you should also
explain whether the tool is valid and reliable?
Title: Factors associated with late diagnosis of breast cancer in women in Togo, Sub- Saharan
Africa
Version: 0 Date: 16 Jan 2023
Reviewer:  Mario Palumbo
Reviewer's report:
I was pleased to review this paper
The methodology used by the Authors is appropriate for the purpose of the article description.
The English language is fluid and well understood. Nevertheless, minor revision is needed.
For the abstract I found clear  the schematization of the content.
Regarding the introduction you can add this paper to deepen the topic.
DOI:  10.1186/1471-2458-14-759
As regards the paper’s structuring (methods/discussion): There is a good structure of the project
with an important  project.
According to some, the delay in families with more women members is reduced, because patients
have the possibility of birth among women. According to your data?
Could teaching self testing techniques in schools improve outcomes?
what biases may have influenced the paper in your opinion?
How do economic factors influence the early treatment?
Results
- The statistical structure seems to me well done;
- Good subdivision into subparagraphs.
-  mention the limitations of the study.
Conclusion
Increase the number of references;
The data obtained are good with respect to the structuring of the work.
Title: Factors associated with late diagnosis of breast cancer in women in Togo, Sub- Saharan
Africa
Version: 0 Date: 28 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
General Impression:
The authors conducted a study about the late diagnosis of breast cancer in Togo. The sample
size is small compared to a prevalent disease and the manuscript lacks important methodological
information. The subject is important on the regional level. I think this paper needs major
revisions before a definitive decision could be made.
Comments:
1. In the methods section of the abstract and main text, please write “women admitted” instead
of “women received”.
2. In the methods section of the abstract and main text, please write “with a histopathological
confirmation of breast cancer” instead of “confirmed histologically”. This provides a better
sentence structure.
3. In the results section of the abstract and the main text, it is unclear how “long delay in the
diagnosis” is a factor associated with “late diagnosis of breast cancer”. I mean the dependent
and the independent variables are the same unless the authors referred to the delay in giving
medical appointments or the results of diagnostic tests.
4. The first part of the background section of the main text has too many numbers and
epidemiological data that were presented in a poor context. I would suggest stating fewer
numbers and statistics, those that are only relevant to the region where the study was conducted.
In addition, the context should be improved linguistically so it is easier for the reader to get the
intended idea.
5. In the methods section of the main text, the studied parameters are “demographic data” not
“epidemiological data”. Please correct this.
6. The methods section of the main text lacks important information regarding the institutional
review board approval and patient informed consent. Please mention the IRB approval number
and date, and please state whether the patients signed an informed consent.
7. In the methods section of the main text, please mention the timeframe of the study, how
patients were allocated, and whether there was a previous sample size calculation. It would be
very beneficial to mention also the inclusion and exclusion criteria. From the results, I can see
that all included patients had a stage 3 or 4, was it an inclusion criterion?
8. In the “Socio-demographic characteristics of patients” of the results, please clarify what you
meant by “the informal sector”.
9. The manuscript requires minor language revision.
Title: Factors associated with late diagnosis of breast cancer in women in Togo, Sub- Saharan
Africa
Version: 0 Date: 29 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. It is a critical discourse. However, I have
a few comments that can strengthen the paper.
Background
1. I fail to see the problem this study seeks to address. The authors should clearly articulate the
problem.
2. The authors must consider including a theory in the background to provide a theoretical
context for the study.
Methods
3. Kindly use the appropriate referencing style. See (AJCC, 2017).
4. What informed the choice of the variables?
Results
5. Check the presentation of age in Table 1 ([15-25[). Kindly revise
Discussion
6. The discussion lacks depth. What are the possible explanations for each of the associated
factors identified?
7. As stated earlier, a theoretical perspective could provide meaningful insight into why the
identified factors were associated with late diagnosis of breast cancer.
Title: Predictors for the change in intimate partner violence among adolescent married girls
aged 15-19 years: Estimates from random effect model
Version: 1 Date: 10 Jun 2022
Reviewer:  Pilar Rodriguez Martinez
Reviewer's report:
The study is well designed. The literature review yields the same significant variables as in other
places, for example, Europe, although here the variable related to dowry and age at marriage
are added.   The analysis techniques are pertinent. And the results are of much interest. I would
like to see it published.