CHECKLIST for Structured Comments to the Authors
Reviewers are asked to maintain a positive and impartial, but critical, attitude in evaluating manuscripts. Criticisms should remain dispassionate.
- What are the major claims of the study and how significant are they?
- Are the claims novel and convincing?
- Are the study design and methods appropriate to the research objectives?
- Is sufficient information provided on procedures and replications?
- Is sufficient information provided on materials and subjects used?
- Is sufficient information included to enable another researcher to judge the experiment and even to be able to repeat the experiment itself?
- Are there any negative results or limitations that are addressed, or should be addressed, in the paper?
- Are the results clearly explained, without unwarranted interpretation?
- Are the claims appropriately discussed in the context of earlier literature?