Evaluation of Midwifery Practices among Registered Midwives in Selected Hospitals in Limpopo Province, South Africa
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the opportunity to review this article reporting on important research.
Line 14, suggest remove 'therefore' and instead put in 'the aim of this research ...'.
Line 17, change to '100 selected hospitals' and fix the spacing at end of sentence.
Line 25, latter part of this sentence is not clear.
Last part of abstract is a bit repetitive. What about recommendations.
Line 42, not sure of the relevance of including Australia in here.
Line 67 intrapartum includes birth.
Line 72 should be new paragraph.
Need to more clearly justify why this research on midwifery practices.
Line 100, a bit confused - said both hospitals here but in abstract you said 100 hospitals. Please clarify and change accordingly.
Line 124, were there any changes made after the pilot and was this data included to the whole study.
Line 133 normally using a questionnaire is implied consent so unsure why written consent was undertaken.
How many questions were in the questionnaire.
Line 154 - already said this and not needed again.
Response rate.
Should not repeat what is in the figure. Suggest just referring to the largest category.
Same with figure 3.2 - just say the largest group.
? whether figure should be figure 1, 2 and so forth not 3.2.
A bit repetitive.
What does advanced registered midwives mean.
Same comments with the rest of the results.
Line 197 ? is the label for the table. Something not quite right here.
Be consistent with use of language - antenatal/pregnancy.
Line 212 new paragraph.
Is use of doula common practice. Need to explain.
Consistent use of language re childbirth/delivery.
Line 224 is this postnatal.
Line 230 where doe this relate to - childbirth, postnatal.
Line 233 new paragraph.
Line 252 - being physically active was not mentioned in the data. What does this mean anyway and how does it relate.
Line 257 repeated this statement later - integrate these two sentences together.
Line 260 need a link between previous point and this one.
Line 286 needs a reference.
Consistent language re antenatal/prenatal.
Line 298 needs a reference.
Line 310 needs a reference.
Line 314 needs a reference and line 316.
Line 319 needs a reference
Line 324 sentence is not clear.
Line 333 sentence does not follow previous sentence. The next sentence should be before this sentence.
Line 343 needs a link from previous point to this one.
Line 361 should be a new paragraph.
Line 367 should be new paragraph and maybe put this before 361 line.
Line 393 needs a reference.
Line 412 is not clear.
Line 415 needs a reference.
Line 428 also would be due to midwives caring for more than one woman during labour/birth.
Line 433 new paragraph.
Conclusion - appears to be more about lack of midwives then lack of education.
What about recommendations.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
editing needed
Author Response
Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Receive the corrections attached.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this study, the current status of midwives in Limpopo Province and their practical difficulties were discussed with the future support plan.
Although this study did not produce in-depth analysis results by adopting a small number of survey participants and simple data analysis methods, it will be of great help in researching the current status of midwives and future support plans for Limpopo Province.
In order to improve the completeness of this study, please revise the following.
- Please check the grammatical errors such as spacing (lines 17,101, etc.)
-Describe specifically how hospitals in the Limpopo Province were selected in Section 2.1.
-Present the Slovin Formula in Section 2.2
-Describe HPM more specifically in Section 4.2.
-The conclusion should start with a new numbering, i.e. 4.4 Conclusions => 5. Conclusions
Author Response
Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Receive the attached correction
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSee attached
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The English Language is fine
Author Response
Thank you for taking your time to review our manuscript. Kindly receive the attached corrections.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors stated "Eight (80) questionnaires were distributed among the respondents ..." Is it eighty (80) or eight (8)? The authors should correct it.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
None
