Submited on: 10 Nov 2010 12:36:55 PM GMT
Published on: 10 Nov 2010 07:04:20 PM GMT
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This is a clear and concise article highlighting a relevant and topical issue in SA. It has the potential to contribute to the notion that interventions need to be targeted and planned for a specific group. The article is soundly presented in a scientific manner. It creates the impetus for further research into the determinants of sexual risk behaviour and in particular the discourse around negotiating condom use  

     

    PS The results page was missing which I accessed from the author to complete this review.

  • Competing interests:
    none
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Senior Specialist Scientist in Health Promotion and Behavioural Science. Published on adolescent sexual risk behavior.  

  • How to cite:  James S -.Comparing STI Risk and Sexual Behaviour Profiles of Pregnant versus Non-pregnant, HIV Negative Black South African Women[Review of the article 'Comparing STI Risk And Sexual Behaviour Profiles Of Pregnant Versus Non-pregnant, HIV Negative Black South African Women ' by Ruiter R].WebmedCentral 2011;2(2):WMCRW00468
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Senior Scientist
Posted by Mr. Anam Nyembezi on 07 Feb 2011 08:54:09 AM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:
    

    1.    On page 3 second line, there is a type error “However, in this context......

     2.    On the results section, I only see the demographic profile of the participants which is also presented in Table 1. I think there is a missing text, for Table 2 and Table 3. Some readers might prefer to read the text, and then read the tables for more information.

     

    I would like to congratulate the authors for such an exploratory work. In general, HIV negative people have been neglected in HIV prevention interventions. Their findings are critical in future interventions.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    None

  • How to cite:  Nyembezi A .Senior Scientist[Review of the article 'Comparing STI Risk And Sexual Behaviour Profiles Of Pregnant Versus Non-pregnant, HIV Negative Black South African Women ' by Ruiter R].WebmedCentral 2011;2(2):WMCRW00443
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Untitled
Posted by Ms. Yoliswa Notshe on 04 Feb 2011 12:25:26 PM GMT

  • Other Comments:

    1. Table 3 state that the results are of sexual behaviour  and condom use by Pregnancy status. However, I am unable to see in this table the comparison by pregnancy status. I am not sure if the results on Table 3 are for pregnant or non-pregnant women
    2. It is interesting to note that while there was no significant difference between the number of sexual partners between pregnant and non-pregnant women, the use or non-use of condoms or practising safer sex was the determining factor in terms of exposure to sexually transmitted infections. In the case of this study while pregnant women had fewer sexual partners (though not that different), they presented with more infections than non-pregnant women.
    I think the paper is moderate with a clear discussion that the focus for STI prevention, particularly HIV seem to be given to already HIV positive people rather than HIV negative people.
    Yoliswa Notshe
    Research Manager

  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Notshe Y .Untitled[Review of the article 'Comparing STI Risk And Sexual Behaviour Profiles Of Pregnant Versus Non-pregnant, HIV Negative Black South African Women ' by Ruiter R].WebmedCentral 2011;2(2):WMCRW00436
Report abuse