Peer Review Checklist

Primary Review | Detailed review – Research articles

Primary Review

• Is it reporting original research or is it another type of article? How does this change your report?
• Does the study answer a question or contribute to the field?
• Is it clear what the authors want to communicate and the direction of the manuscript?
• Is the manuscript original?
• What contribution does the article make to the field of study?
• Are you concerned about the language? Are revisions needed to make it possible to review?
• Is the overall study design and approach appropriate?
   

Detailed Review – Research Articles

Title

• Does it express clearly what the manuscript is about?
• Does it contain any unnecessary description?

Abstract

• Is it a short and clear summary of the aims, key methods, important findings and conclusions?
• Does it include enough information to stand alone?
• Does it contain unnecessary information?

Introduction

• Does it clearly summarize the current state of the topic?
• Was a thorough review of preexisting research conducted?
• Were other research studies properly referenced?
• Is the rationale for the question provided?
• Does it address the limitations of current knowledge in this field?
• Does it clearly explain why the study was necessary?
• Does it clearly define the aim of the study and is this consistent with the rest of the manuscript?

 Methods

• Are the study design and methods appropriate for the research question?
• Is the study design clear?
• Are the methods sufficiently detailed so that someone else could repeat what was done?
• Was the source of subjects discussed?
• Is it clear how samples were collected or how participants were recruited?
• Is there any potential bias in the sample or in the recruitment of participants?
• Are the correct controls/ validation included?
• Are any potential confounding factors considered?
• Has any randomization been done correctly?
• Is the time-frame of the study sufficient to see outcomes?
• Do you have any ethical concerns?

Results

• Are the results presented clearly and accurately?
• Do the results presented match the methods?
• Have all the relevant data been included?
• Is there any risk of patients or participants being identified?
• Is the data described in the text consistent with the data in the figures and tables?

Discussion and conclusion

• Do the authors logically explain the findings?
• Do the authors compare the findings with current findings in the research field?
• Are the implications of the findings for future research and potential applications discussed?
• Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?
• Are any limitations of the study discussed?
• Are any contradictory data discussed?

Tables and figures

• Are data presented in a clear and appropriate manner?
• Is the presentation of tables and figures consistent with the description in text?
• Do the figure legends and table headings clearly explain what is shown?
• Do the figures and tables include measures of uncertainty, such as standard error or confidence intervals, where required as well as the sample size?
• Do you have any concerns about the manipulation of data?

References

• Are there any key references missing?
• Do the authors cite the initial discoveries where suitable?
• Are there places where the authors cite a review but should cite the original paper?
• Do the cited studies represent current knowledge?

Final checks – before you submit your report

• Have you given a brief summary of the article and highlighted the key messages?
• Have you given positive feedback as well as constructive criticism?
• Have you made it clear which of your concerns are major (significant points, essential for publication) or minor (smaller issues, may not be essential for publication)?
• Are your concerns specific, with examples where possible?
• Have you numbered your comments and referred to page/ line numbers in the article to make it easy for the authors to address your points?
• Is your feedback constructive, and focused on the research?
• If you were the authors, would you understand how to improve the manuscript?
• If you were the Editor, would the comments be detailed enough to help you make a decision?
• Have you checked the spelling and grammar in your report?
• Have you included your comments in the correct places in the online system – checking that any confidential comments for editors are in the right place – and have you answered all the questions?