Instructions For Manuscript Peer-Review

Instructions For Manuscript Peer-Review

1.Does the title represent the manuscript's core subject/hypothesis?

2.Is the abstract accurate in summarizing and reflecting the work mentioned in the manuscript?

3.Is the emphasis of the manuscript reflected in the key words?

4.Is the background, current status, and importance of the study sufficiently described in the manuscript?

5.Does the paper include enough information about the material and method used (for example, experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials)?

6.Did the experiments utilized in this study meet the research objectives? What are the study's contributions to this field's research progress?

7.Does the paper fit the biostatistics requirements?

8.Does the text adhere to the International System of Units (SI)?

9.Is the manuscript effectively and appropriately interpreting the findings, stressing the essential elements in a brief, clear, and logical manner? Is the applicability/relevance of the results to the literature described in a clear and precise manner? Is the discussion factual, and does it go into enough detail on the paper's scientific importance and/or clinical relevance?

10.Are the figures, diagrams, and tables adequate, of acceptable quality, and illustrative of the paper's contents? Is it necessary to mark figures with arrows, asterisks, and better legends?

11.Is there a proper citation of the most recent, relevant, and authoritative sources in the introduction and discussion portions of the manuscript? Is there any evidence that the author self-cites, omits, mistakenly cites, or over-cites references?

12.Is the manuscript organized and presented in a clear, succinct, and consistent manner? Is the language, style, and grammar correct and appropriate?

13.Authors should have organized their papers into the following categories based on document type:

A. CARE Checklist: Case report.

B. STROBE Statement: Case Control study, Observational study, Retrospective Cohort study.

C. The ARRIVE Guidelines: Basic study.

D. CONSORT Statement: Clinical Trials study, Prospective study, Randomized Controlled trial, Randomized Clinical trial.

E. PRISMA Checklist: Evidence-Based Medicine, Systematic review, Meta-Analysis.

14.Authors must present proper ethics documentation that have been examined and approved by their local ethical review committee for all publications including human research and/or animal experiments. Is the text up to snuff in terms of ethics?


Authors' Specific Remarks

Please provide specific comments to writers based on the criteria stated above for new manuscript peer-review and the criteria indicated below for writing comments.

What are the manuscript's original findings? What are the new theories suggested in this study? What new phenomena have been discovered as a result of this study's experiments? What were the hypotheses tested in this study and found to be true?

What is the manuscript's quality and significance? What are the study's latest findings? What are the new ideas proposed in this study? What are the novel approaches offered in this study? Do the findings adequately summarize the information presented in this study? What are some of the study's standout findings? What are the major issues in this subject that this research has addressed?

What are the study's and its findings' limitations? What are the potential future directions for the issue discussed in this paper? What are the unanswered questions or unresolved issues? What are the next steps that the authors should take as a result of this research? What influence may this paper have on fundamental research and/or clinical practice?