Submit a manuscript Sign up for article alerts Contact us


Latest comments

An opportunity to confront uncertainty? (Holly Jenkins, 20 October 2015)

Dr Holly Jenkins, Dr Andy Liu , Dr Nicola Schinaia, Mr Darryl Quantz, Mr Sam Rowell, Mrs Lea Madgwick, Dr Alberto Mateo, Dr Sarah Blagden, Caroline Holtom, Dr Rebecca... read full comment

Comment on: Touboul-Lundgren et al. BMC Public Health, 15:908

Errors of calculation, stated protocol violations, and documentation (Kathryn Kaiser, 12 August 2015)

Having recently published a paper on the same topic, we read this paper (published August, 2014) by Mytton and colleagues (the authors) with great interest. We identified several important issues that vitiate confidence in the paper by the authors that are more fully described in the link found on PubMed Commons: Sincerely,   Kathryn A. Kaiser, Ph.D. Andrew W. Brown, Ph.D. David B. Allison, Ph.D. Office of Energetics, Nutrition and Obesity Research Center, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham read full comment

Comment on: Mytton et al. BMC Public Health, 14:886

Comment on the paper: “Child survival and BCG vaccination: a community based prospective cohort study in Uganda”. (Ane Fisker, 13 July 2015)

We have with interest read the paper by Nankabirwa et al[1] and would like to commend the authors for having made the great effort to collect information about vaccination status at several home visits between 3 weeks and 7 years of age. At the Bandim Health Project (, we are accessing the real-life effects of vaccines, including BCG, on child health. In concordance with our studies, Nankabirwa et al. present data supporting that BCG vaccination reduces all-cause mortality in early... read full comment

Comment on: Nankabirwa et al. BMC Public Health, 15:175

Acknowledgement (Kennedy Otwombe, 7th July 2015) (Kennedy Otwombe, 08 July 2015)

This study was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (grant number 5R21MH83308) and the South African AIDS Vaccine Initiative (SAAVI), formerly a division of the South African Medical Research Council.​ read full comment

Comment on: Otwombe et al. BMC Public Health, 15:450

Further information on Beyond Bushfires study (Elyse Baker, 29 June 2015)

As an author on this project, I would like to make you aware that there are a range of findings coming out of the Beyond Bushfires study which can all be accessed from the project’s website ( The Beyond Bushfires study and outputs have only been possible due to the strong partnerships and funding provided by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant (LP100200164) including financial and in-kind contributions from Linkage partners - Department of Health, Australian Red Cross, Australian Rotary Health, Centrelink, Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, and six Primary Care Partnerships: Central Hume, Bendigo Loddon, North East, Outer East, Central West Gippsland, Lower Hume.... read full comment

Comment on: Gibbs et al. BMC Public Health, 13:1036

Erratum (Igor Burstyn, 12 June 2015)

I am thankful to Dr. Zvi Herzig for noticing an error in units in one result reported in the paper (Burstyn, 2014).  The sentence “Assuming extreme consumption of the liquid per day via vaping (5 to 25 ml/day and 50-95% propylene glycol in the liquid), levels of propylene glycol in inhaled air can reach 1–6 mg/m3” should read “… levels of propylene glycol in inhaled air can reach 1–6 g/m3”.  This strengthens the stated conclusion that “… estimated levels of exposure to propylene glycol … warrant concern.”  The corrected calculation was one of several that were used to draw this conclusion.  It was a worse-than-worst-realistic-case scenario and would have to be reconciled with... read full comment

Comment on: Burstyn BMC Public Health, 14:18

Acknowledgment (Anca Gaston, 02 June 2015)

The authors would like to acknowledge that this research was supported by funds to the Canadian Research Data Centre Network (CRDCN) from the Social Science and Humanities research Council (SSHRC), the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR), the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and Statistics Canada. Although the research and analysis are based on data from Statistics Canada, the opinions expressed do not represent the views of Statistics Canada or the Canadian Research Data Centre Network (CRDCN).   read full comment

Comment on: Gaston et al. BMC Public Health, 14:1127

A failure to respond to legitimate concerns (Brian Carter, 27 March 2015)

With all due respect, Dr. Popova, you have not responded to any of the substantive comments detailed below.  Legitimate questions have been raised concerning your methodology that have a direct bearing on how “valuable” your data is and if your conclusions are justified to the extent of informing policy... read full comment

Comment on: Popova et al. BMC Public Health, 14:997

Correction (Takanori Honda, 12 March 2015)

The authors wish to report a problem in our previously published paper. We would like to apologize for a mistake in the following description in the Discussion section (page 6, right... read full comment

Comment on: Honda et al. BMC Public Health, 14:1307

'Retrospective" case-control study?? (Berihun Megabiaw Zeleke, 17 February 2015)

I am very happy to read such a study on a neglected tropic epidemic infectious... read full comment

Comment on: van den Bogaart et al. BMC Public Health, 13:332

Authors' response to the readers' comments (Lucy Popova, 10 February 2015)

The points raised about the study reflect the fact that, consistent with standard scientific writing practices, the protocol was described briefly.   The complete protocol, including the full questionnaire and the debriefing, was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of California San Francisco according to University, state, and federal regulations, and the study was conducted in strict accordance to the approved protocol.

The scientific literature on the harmful effects of e-cigarettes is by no means settled.  (See, for example,  “Electronic nicotine delivery systems” WHO report to the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, July 21, 2014, read full comment

Comment on: Popova et al. BMC Public Health, 14:997

Qualitative Study on the results - Swedish boat association with members in the most associated group middle/older males. Have sustained experience of deaths caused by alcohol and drugs. (Lars Erik Larsson, 17 December 2014)

Dear Kristin Ahlm and BMC,   As a chairman of a Swedish boating association and as an assosciate of Akloma Bioscience I would like to make my presence. The T1 table by Ahlm et al. shows that most corresponding deaths occured in Stockholm. Me and my members are willing for in-depth interviews if there would be qualitative study based on the segment group middle/older age males located in Stockholm. Don't hesitate to contact me. You can find the responding details on our contact web site.   Regards, Lars Erik Larsson read full comment

Comment on: Ahlm et al. BMC Public Health, 13:216

Corrections to Table 3. (Chinmoy Sarkar, 05 December 2014)

The authors will like to apologize for their oversight in the Table 3 of the paper and incorporate the following... read full comment

Comment on: Sarkar et al. BMC Public Health, 13:695

wrong URL link (Matthias Bopp, 01 December 2014)

The first URL address of used data sources (page 2, first line of second column) is correct in the print version, but not in the corresponding pointer, thus impeding a successful automatic link when clicking on the text mark. The correct URL is   sorry for any inconvenience read full comment

Comment on: Zellweger et al. BMC Public Health, 14:1157

Upgraded web-based prioritization tool for TB screening based on the WHO guidelines (Nobuyuki Nishikiori, 17 November 2014)

Since the publication of this paper, much experience has been gained in TB screening in many parts of the... read full comment

Comment on: Nishikiori et al. BMC Public Health, 13:97

Author name correction  (Fantahun Biadglegne, 10 November 2014)

The last name for the first author in this manuscript  should be corrected as Biadglegne  read full comment

Comment on: Biadgelegn et al. BMC Public Health, 12:707

Re Alternative methods of fluoride distribution (Neil Lanceley, 29 October 2014)

Most indigenous Australians living a triditional and remote lifestyle, would not typically use either milk or salt as part of their diet, which is composed of praditional food sourced from nature by hunting. The only suitable means of fluoride consumption would by means of micro fluoride plants or supplementary sources. read full comment

Comment on: Ehsani et al. BMC Public Health, 7:100

CORRECTION (M. Angels Via, 06 October 2014)

We have noticed a mistake in the published article “Screening premorbid metabolic syndrome in community pharmacies: a cross sectional study”. The number of the approval of the study from the Ethics Committee is incorrect. The correct number is CEXT032013.       read full comment

Comment on: Via-Sosa et al. BMC Public Health, 14:487

Research by Povova and Ling is unethical, poor-quality, and misrepresented (Carl Phillips, 01 October 2014)

This comment on “Nonsmokers’ responses to new warning labels on smokeless tobacco and electronic cigarettes: an experimental study”, by Lucy Popova and Pamela M Ling, begins with a critique of the paper itself, followed by a brief analysis of the journal peer-review that led to the paper being published. The paper suffered from fatal ethical flaws, a methodology that had no chance of showing anything useful, and a presentation that focused not on the study but on the authors’ policy preferences, which they did not even attempt to support with analysis or arguments. The reviews did not remedy this, and indeed made it... read full comment

Comment on: Popova et al. BMC Public Health, 14:997

"Let's lie before they believe the truth!" (Benjamin Denny, 29 September 2014)

This study finds that when users are lied to and told that the harms of a product far exceed what is proven about that product, they consider it more dangerous. It also finds that when companies are kept from accurately stating that their products are less dangerous than products they provide an alternative to, users fail to accurately believe that those products are less... read full comment

Comment on: Popova et al. BMC Public Health, 14:997

Misleading people about risk of tobacco products: unethical and harmful (Clive Bates, 29 September 2014)

This paper uses an inappropriate and unethical experiment to advocate misleading people about risk in order to modify their behaviour in ways that the authors favour.  The authors appear untroubled by the fact that smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes actually are of the order 95-100% less risky than smoking [1][2].  If you smoke this is important health-sensitive information. If you don't smoke, this information is merely... read full comment

Comment on: Popova et al. BMC Public Health, 14:997

Funding source (Duleeka Knipe, 25 September 2014)

DWK is funded by a Wellcome Trust 4-year studentship (WT099874MA). read full comment

Comment on: Knipe et al. BMC Public Health, 14:839

Scoring of Community Commitment Scale in Appendix TableS4 (Ayumi Kono, 17 September 2014)

The scoring of Table S4 should be amended. The correct scoring of the CCS is as follows: 0;Strongly disagree,1;Slightly disagree, 2;Slightly agree,3; Strongly agree read full comment

Comment on: Kono et al. BMC Public Health, 12:903

Correction of legend Figure 2 (Herman Van Oyen, 15 September 2014)

Figure 2 Decomposition of the difference between ex- and current smokers with never smokers  in Disability Free Life Expectancy (DFLE30-80), (Severe) Disability Life Expectancy (DLE(_S)30-80) between ages 30 and 80 by type of effect (mortality or disability), Health Interview Survey 1997 and 2001 and follow-up until respectively 31/12/2007 and 31/12/2010, Belgium. Legend: Panels a, b: DFLE30-80 (a: Males; b: Females). Panels c,d: DLE30-80 (c: Males; d Females). Panels e, f: DLE_S30-80 (e: Males; f: Females). Black dot symbol: difference in years DFLE, DLE, DLE_S with never smokers and 95% CI. Green triangle symbol: mortality effect and 95% CI. Red letter x symbol: disability effect and 95% CI. read full comment

Comment on: Van Oyen et al. BMC Public Health, 14:723

Surprised that David Olds' Denver trial of Nurse-Family Partnership was not included (Ted Miller, 08 September 2014)

I wish an on-line supplement were available showing studies that scored below 13 and listing their scores. I am especially interested in why the generally well-respected Denver Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP) trial's paraprofessional arm was screened out. A problem I have with many of these trials is that they test for scores and scores of outcomes, then test again on subgroups, yet have no concern for spurious correlations. read full comment

Comment on: Peacock et al. BMC Public Health, 13:17