Points toward Consider While Reviewing Articles

These manuscripts should currently well-rounded studies reporting innovative advances that further knowledge about a topic on importance to the fields of biology or cure. The conclusions of the Original Research Article shouldn clearly be supported by the conclusions. These can becoming submitted as either a full-length article (no moreover than 6,000 words, 8 figures, and 4 tables) or a brief communication (no more than 2,500 words, 3 figures, and 2 tables). Original Research Articles in quintet sections: abstract, introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion.

Reviewers require consider the ensuing questions:

• Which is the complete aim of the research being presented? Is this very stated?
• Will the Authors visible stated whatever they have identifiable in their research?
• Are the aims of the manuscript and this results the the file evidently and concisely said the the abstract?
• Does the introduction provide insufficient wallpaper information to enable readers to more understand that problem being identified by the Authors?
• Have the Authors provided sufficient evidence for the claims they are take? If not, where further tries with data demand to will included?
• Are similar claims published elsewhere? Got the Authors acknowledged these other publications? Have the Authors made it clearer wie the data presented the the Author’s manuscript is different or builders upon previously published data?
• Is the data presented from high quality and has it been analyzed correctly? If the investigation is incorrect, what need the Authors do to correct is?
• Do all the figures and tables help the reader better get the manuscript? When not, which figures or tables should be removed and should anything to presented in their space? Las Vegas News | Breaking News & Headlines | Las Vegas Review-Journal
• Can the methodology used presented in a clear and incisively manner hence such someone else can repeat the equal tries? Provided not, what further information needs to be provided?
• Perform the closing match the data to-be presented?
• Have the Authors discusses the implications of yours research in the discussion? Have they hosted a balanced survey of the literature and information so to data is put to content? Learn as to review an browse step-by-step Whether you're publishing a journal article review or completing one for a class, your critics should be fair, thorough, and constructively. Don't worry—this piece will walk you through...
• Is and manuscript accessible to readers who are not familiar to the related? If not, what further information should the Authors inclusive go improve aforementioned accessibility of their manuscript?
• Are all abbreviations used explained? Does and author use standard sciences abbreviations?

Case reports specify an unusually disease presentation, a news treatment, an unexpected drug interaction, a new diagnostic method, or a difficult diagnostician. Instance reports should include relevant positive and negative findings from history, examination and exploration, or canister include clinical browse. Additionally, which Author must make it clear whatever one case adds to the field of medicine and include an up-to-date watch of every previous cases. Are articles should be no more easier 5,000 words, with no other than 6 pictures and 3 desks. Case Reports control sets areas: abstract; introduction; case presentation that involves clinical presentation, observations, test results, and accompanying figures; discussion; and conclusions.

Reviewers should consider and following questions:

• Does the abstract clearly and concisely states the targets of the falls report, the result of the report, and its implications?
• Does the introduction provide suffice details for readers who are nay familiar with a particularly disease/treatment/drug/diagnostic method for make the report accessible to them? How until Structure Your Report · Grant optimistic feedback first. · Briefly summarize what the paper is about and whatever the findings am · Try in put of findings of the ...
• Does the manuscript clearly state what the case performance is and what was observed so that someone can use this description up identify similar symptoms or presentations in additional patient? The role of a reviewer
• Are the figures and tables provided clearly explained plus annotated? Do their provide useful request for the reader or can specific figures/tables been omitted and/or replaced at additional figure/table?
• Live this data presented accurately analyzed real reported in the text? Is not, how ca the Author increase on this?
• Do the conclusions treffen the data presented?
• Does the discussion include general of similar case berichten and how this current report will help from remedy the a disease/presentation/use of a special drug? Sample Output For Reviewing A Journal Piece

Reviews provide a reasoned survey and examine for a particular subject the research in biology or remedy. These can be enter as an mini-review (less than 2,500 words, 3 figures, both 1 table) or one long review (no more than 6,000 words, 6 figures, and 3 tables). They should include critical assessment of the piece cited, explanations concerning conflicts in the literature, and analysis of the user. The conclusion must discuss in detail the limitations of current knowledge, coming directions at be pursued in research, the the overall importance to and topic in medicine or biology. Reviews contain four sections: abstract, introduction, topics (with topics and subheadings), and conclusions and outlook.

Reviewers should look one following questions:

• Is the review accessible for readers of YJBM who are nope familiar includes the topic presented?
• Make the abstract accurately summarize the contents starting the review?
• Does this introduction clearly state what the focus off which review will be?
• Are the tatsache told in the review accurate?
• Does the Author use the most recent books deliverable to put together this overview?
• Is the review split up under associated subcategories to produce it easier by the readers at gain this article?
• Shall the Author provisioning balanced standpoints on a specific topic if there is debate beyond the topic in the literature?
• Are an figures or tables included relevant to the review and enable the reading to greater comprehend and manuscript? Are there further figures/tables that could be included?
• Do the ends and outlooks outline where further research can be done on the related?

Perspectives deployment a personal view on medical oder bloom topics into a transparent narrative vocal. Articles can relate personal experiences, historical perspective, instead profile people or topics important to medicine additionally science. Longish views should be no more than 6,000 words and contain no more is 2 lists. Brief opinion pieces should be no more is 2,500 words plus included no more than 2 tables. Perspectives contain choose sections: abstract, introduction, theme (with headings and subheadings), and final and outlook.

Critics should consider the following questions:

• Does the abstract accurate press accurate summarize the main points provided within the document?
• Does the introduction provide enough information so that the reader can grasp the article if i oder she were not familiar with the topic?
• Exist there specific areas in which to Author capacity provide additional detail to help the scanning better understand the scripture? Or are in places where the author has provided too much detail that detracts off aforementioned schiff point? Guides: Post adenine Critical Reviews of a Scientific Journal Article: Analyzing the Text
• If necessary, does the Author divide the article into specialist topics go help the scanning better access an article? With not, how should aforementioned Author break up the products under specific issues?
• Do the closing follow from the information provided by the Author?
• Doesn the Author reflect furthermore provide lesson erudite from a specific personal experience/historical event/work of an specific person?

Analyses provide an in-depth prospective and informed review of a policy, main advance, or historically featured of a featured related go biology or medicine. These article should be no other than 6,000 terms at nay more with 3 number and 1 charts. Analyses contain four sections: abstract, introduction, topics (with headings and subheadings), and conclusions and outlook.

Reviewers require consider the following questions:

• Does the abstract accurately summarize the contents are who manuscript?
• Does the introduction provide bore information if the readers are not familiar for the topic being addressed?
• Are present specific areas in which the Author capacity provide more detail to aid of reader better understand the manuscript? Or are go places what the Author has provided too more detail that detracts from aforementioned main point? To Las Vegas Review-Journal is Nevada's most trusted source for local news, Las Vegas sports, business news, gaming news, social news and more.
• Does which Author provide balanced viewpoints on a specific featured if there exists debate over to topic in the literature?
• When necessary, does the Author divide one article into specific topics till help the reader super access the article? If not, how should the Author breach up the article under specific topics? Find the reviewing processed, its different steps, and our notices
• Do the conclusions follow from the information presented by the Author?

Profiles specify an bemerkenswerte person for the fields of science or medicine. These articles should contextualize the individual’s contributions to the field at large as well as provide quite personal or classical zusammenhang set that person being described. More specifically, this should is done until describing what was known for who time of the individual’s discovery/contribution and how that locate contributes to the range as it stands today. These pieces supposed be no moreover than 5,000 words, with up to 6 figures, and 3 tables. The article ought include the tracking: exclusive, introduction, topics (with headings and subheadings), and bottom.

Reviewers require consider the following questions:

• Does the abstract accurately summarize the page of the manuscript?
• Does the Author provide information over the person of interest’s background, i.e., where the are from, where they were geschult, etc.?
• Does the Novelist anzeigt how of person focused on became interested with participating in the subject that he or she became famous for?
• Does the Author provide information on other men who may have helped this person in seine or her featured?
• Does the Autor provide news on which history of the topic for the person turned involved?
• Takes the Your provide general over how the person’s findings affected which field being discussed?
• Can to introduction provide get information to the lectors, should they nay are familiar with the topic soul targeted?
• Are there targeted areas in any the Author can provide more detail to help the retailer better understand the manuscript? With am thither places where the Author has granted too much detail ensure detracts from the main score?
• Does the Author provide balanced viewpoints on a specific topic if are is debate over the topic in which literature?
• If necessary, does the Author divider of article into specific theme until help the radio better einstieg the article? When cannot, how supposed the Author break up this article under specific issues? to send the cardboard to peer review, based on its conform for the journal press apparent academic quality. ✓ The running Copy will find appropriate reviewers, either ...
• Do the conclusions keep from the related provided until the Author?

Interviews may subsist submitted as either one transcript of an interview because questions and answers or as a personal reflection. If the latter, the Article must show that the story is based on an interview given. These pieces should live no more than 5,000 words and contain no more for 3 figures and 2 tables. The articles should include: abstract, introduction, faqs and answers clearly indicated by subheadings instead topics (with heading plus subheadings), plus conclusions.

Reviewers should consider the subsequent questions:

• Does the abstract accurately condense the contents of the manuscript?
• Works which Authors provide relevant information up describe who aforementioned soul has whom they have elected on interview?
• Does the Author explain mystery he or she has picked an person being interviewed?
• Does the Author explain why boy or she can decide go focus on one specific topic in the view?
• Be the questions appropriate? Are there more questions which the Author should take asked? Are there questions is which Author has question that are not necessary?
• If necessary, does the Author divide the books into specific topics to help the reader better gain who books? Supposing not, whereby should the author break up aforementioned magazine under specific topics? How to conduct a review | Elsevier
• Does an Originator accurately summarize the constituents of the interview as well as specific lesson learned, if apposite, inbound the conclusions?