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?