Reviewers’ Checklist

First Read-Through

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

For Research Articles


  • Does it express clearly what the manuscript is about?
  • Does it highlight the importance of the study?
  • Does it contain any unnecessary description?


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


  • Does it clearly summarize the current state of the topic?
  • 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?
  • Is the research question clear and appropriate?


  • Are the study design and methods appropriate for the research question?
  • Is there enough detail to repeat the experiments?
  • 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?
  • Is there sufficient power and appropriate statistics?
  • Do you have any ethical concerns?


  • 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?


  • Are there any key references missing?
  • Are there places where the authors cite a review but should cite the original paper?
  • Do the cited studies represent current knowledge but not too old?

For Review Articles

Many of the same questions will be relevant to all articles. However, articles which do not present original research are unlikely to have a methods section and results but may be more focused on the discussion of a topic. As with original articles, the key questions to be considered for review articles are as follows:

  • Is there any content which has been previously presented in a review?
  • Does it focus on recent advances in research?
  • Is it a balanced and unbiased overview of current understanding?
  • Are any recent or important references missing?
  • Is it too focused on the author’s own research?
  • Is the interpretation and presentation of results of previous studies accurate and precise?
  • Has it a valuable contribution to the research field?
  • Is it understandable for non-expert readers?