Follow Us On Social Media

Reviewer Scorecard

Please answer the following questions regarding your assigned manuscript. If a question about a Section does not appear in your assignment, please check “Not applicable.”

    Reviewer Information


    Manuscript Reviewed


    Result of Review

    Based on my review below, I recommend that the above referenced manuscript be: (check onebox only)


    1. OVERALL: Does the manuscript report a significant innovation that will improve our understanding, diagnosis, treatment or prevention of disease in humans?


    2. ABSTRACT: Do the authors clearly and accurately describe the content of the article, including the innovation being reported and its impact based on their findings or theory?


    3a. BACKGROUND: Do the authors adequately and accurately synthesize the current state of the art as it relates to their innovation and the clinical problem it addresses?


    3b. BACKGROUND: Is the hypothesis, problem, theory or objective significant and concisely stated?


    3c. BACKGROUND: Is the innovation explicitly and concisely reported?


    4a. MATERIALS & METHODS: Is the experimental design described comprehensively?


    4b. MATERIALS & METHODS: Is the statistical analysis appropriate for the study design?


    5. PATIENT PRESENTATION: Are the study subjects, etiology of the problem, diagnosis and treatment objectives described accurately and comprehensively?


    6a. RESULTS: Are results reported fully, clearly and in a logical sequence?


    6b. RESULTS/TREATMENT OUTCOME: Do the data adequately assess the innovation?


    7. DISCUSSION: Do the authors systematically discuss the results/treatment outcome of their innovation? Specifically, do the authors provide insights into how their findings support, refute or offer new directions to the current thinking on their research topic?


    8. INNOVATION STATEMENT: Do the authors adequately and accurately state the impact of their innovation for improving our understanding, diagnosis, treatment or prevention of disease in humans?


    9. REFERENCES: Is adequate reference made to other work in the field?


    10. LANGUAGE: Is the English language usage acceptable?


    11. Comments to the Authors:


    12. Comments to the Editor (confidential):


    By reviewing this manuscript for Innovation, you acknowledge that you have no conflict of interest regarding any aspect of the manuscript or its authors. Please check one box indicating any conflict of interest: