Overall statement

The study aims to explore the relationship at country-population level between women empowerment and tobacco use gender inequality controlling economic factors using secondary data analyses. The paper’s results imply public health concerns related to counter the rising women tobacco use in developing countries, despite the cross-sectional nature of the study and describe that women empowerment is associated with women tobacco use. In addition, I have some considerations:

Major issues

1. The authors do a nice job describing the background of the global public health issue of tobacco use which will increase by women tobacco use in developing countries. However, the logical progression of the introduction could improve. The goals and objectives of the study are mixed with the field gaps. I suggest that the paragraph where literature gaps are described takes place before the characteristics and goals of the study. This may increase the statement of the problem of the research and how the authors fill the gaps and address the problem adding value and relevance to their study.

2. Also, some ideas in the introduction can be summarized such as examples and quotes while social factors and determinants of tobacco use may receive more emphasis in addition to marketing targets. For example, the greater women empowerment socially and economically may expand the range of behaviours which women can carry out in their lifestyle either healthy (e.g., physical activity) or detrimental (e.g., alcohol or tobacco use).

3. The employed methodology and results address the relationship between women empowerment and tobacco use independently economic factors. Nonetheless, the association between variables in low-, middle- and high-income countries may differ. Moreover, authors state that the rise of women smoking may be higher in low- and middle-income countries than high ones. Thus, I suggest split the multiple linear regression model by low-, middle- and high-income countries for deeper results and external validity.

4. The discussion section provides a great interpretation of the results for study’s implications. Findings are compared not only with reports in agreement but also those ones that found no association between gender empowerment, (or development) and women tobacco use. Limitations are clearly defined, common and minor issues from secondary data analysis and cross-sectional studies being also justified. But the discussion may still improve in some aspects. The first paragraph is too disperse. I recommend place it in the implications subsection and starting the discussion with key findings.

Minor issues

The title may improve by including a short sentence or name of the study design or by rephrasing regarding to study's results. For example: Gender empowerment is associated with a higher female-to-male smoking ratio - a cross-sectional study.

The inclusion in the abstract of the number of countries is encouraged to add information of sample size.

Please, state the statistical significance level of p-value at the end of the statistical analysis subsection.

Table 3 seems redundant due to its few number of columns and rows. I suggest including table 3’s information in the text.

I recommend not using interrogative sentences in conclusions as “…have to follow from the good?” or “…inevitably be accompanied by increases in women’s smoking prevalence rates?” Affirmative and take-home messages may be more appropriate and increase the readability of the paper.