INTERNAL PEER REVIEW FORM

TITLE

YES / NO / NA
Is it easy to understand?
Is it simple and short? (no more than 10 or 12 words)
Does it show the population involved in the study?
Is the study design indicated in the title?
Does it begin with a key word?

NA: Non Applicable

ABSTRACT

YES / NO / NA
Is it easy to understand.?
Is it simple, short and concise?
Does it use abbreviations?
Is it structured (with subtitles or not)?
Does the author give an accurate promise of the paper’s content in the introduction subtitles?
Does the introductory section briefly describes the background information?
Does the introduction section specifically describes the scope of the study?
Is the main hypothesis given in the introduction section?
Does the methods section indicates the number of patients, and their main characteristics specially the inclusion and exclusion criteria?
Does the methods section indicates the study design?
Does the results section exclude key information?
Are the main results are given clearly with the statistic significance?
Are the main hypothesis answered in the discussion?
In discussion is the relevance of the study clear?
Is the information redundantly repeated in different subtitles?

INTRODUCTION

YES / NO / NA
Does it explain why the study is necessary?
Does it begin with the description of the problem?
Are there reference of previous articles about the problem?
Are new, unusual or vague terms defined?
Is it too long?
Has it too many references?
Is the purpose of the study described?

METHOD

YES / NO / NA
Is it organized according to meaningful subheadings?
Is it the data collection method well described?
Are the terms, criteria, grades defined?
Are the inclusion and exclusion criteria defined?
Are the beginning and ending dates of the study clear?
Is the randomizing process described?
Is the informed consent process described?
Are the used devices or drugs described?
Are the medical tests and procedures described?
Are the end points defined?
Are the outcome`s criteria defined?
Has the sample size statistical power?
Are there error type I or type II?
Are the medians reported?
Is the statistical analysis easy to understand?
Is the statistical significance defined?

RESULTS

Yes / No / NA
Did you keep it simple and organized?
Did you start with major positive findings?
Did you describe the sample study?
Did you use a table to compare/describe study groups?
Are your study groups comparable?
Did you report relative risk and 95% confidence interval?
Did you use exact P values?
Do your results fit the journal’s format?
Did you use any “pejorative” terms to describe patients?
Did you specify follow up time?
Did you describe small samples too short for analysis?
Did you make any interpretation that should be kept in the discussion section?
TABLES
Is it simple and self explanatory?
Did you follow journal’s format?
Did you repeat information of the text?
Did you use double-spaced?
Are your units provided for each variable?
Are the exact P values included?
Are values rounded appropriately?
Is your format consistent with other tables?
FIGURES
Did you use thick lines?
Is there a clear and detailed legend?
Is there information that is not included in the text?
Is there an easy to understand axis label?
Did you use exact “P” values?
Is it self explanatory?
Are numbers displayed for each subgroup?

DISCUSSION

YES / NO / NA
Do you start the discussion with your most important point? (p.e: this paper shows...)
Are you responding to the main hypothesis?
Aren´t you repeating information from introduction, results or another part of your paper?
Are you confining the discussion only to your results?
Are you discussing methodically your results? (p.e: following their previous order of appearence, or in order of priority)
Are you describing the new information that your paper provides?
Are you comparing only your results with other publications?
Have you identified a control group in litterature?
Are you explaining your surprising results?
Do you anticipate show clearly the pitfalls of your study?
Do you include a paragraph such as “limitations of the study”?
Are you modest and diplomatic?
Are you recognizing the selection biais, sampling problems and limitation of the stathystic methods?
Are you keeping your discussion focused?
Are you keeping your discussion short?
Is your discussion the second largest part of your paper?

CONCLUSIONS

YES / NO / NA
Does it state the author recommendations?
Are the conclusions correctly derived from the data presented?
Does it explain what are the clinical implications of the study findings?
Are the further research needed described?