Check-list for Peer Reviewers

This check-list is meant to be applied in tandem with the “Instructions to Peer Reviewers” and
represents the basic considerations organized by category in reviewing a review-manuscript. Peer
reviewers are requested to provide a list of all citations referenced within the manuscript to which the
following has been applied (i.e., Smith, 2009). As is stated within the accompanying document,
though, reviewers are invited to add to their written report to the Editor-in-Chief other considerations
which they may find important.

The premise and related topics are logically presented

• the hypothesis is clearly stated

• the elaboration which follows it is consistent with the hypothesis

The topics examined represent the relevant ones regarding the hypothesis

• other factors in relation to the hypothesis which are relevant have been adequately addressed
in the manuscript, and if not, does this have a bearing upon the validity of the hypothesis –
i.e., while a certain topic may not have been examined in as much detail, if it is relevant, it
has at the very least been noted in the manuscript

The author's citations reflect those of a current literature search

• the references of the supporting, cited literature represent the current understanding of
issue(s) associated with the hypothesis being examined in the manuscript

The author's presentation of material presented in a given citation

• the references to the supporting, cited literature accurately reflect in each instance that
which was author(s) of the original study reported, including initial hypothesis, methodology,
results generated, ensuing discussion, and conclusions drawn as well as limitations which
may have been pointed out in the published citation. “Accurately” from a statistical stand-
point is otherwise defined as:
 reporting results presented within the citation which may be in opposition to the
hypothesis of the manuscript as well as supporting data
 numerical accuracy
 reporting of statistical data as a metric for that which it was intended
 reporting the originating source

Possible limitations of a citation which were not presented in a given citation

• possible limitations in a methodology, which have not been noted by the authors of a
supporting citation but which may be present, have been addressed in the manuscript,
including scientific, legislative and ethical considerations

The author's interpretation of data of a given citation can be made, including recommendations/
conclusions

• conclusions made by the author which are interpretive of data in 5. are those which can be
drawn from the data and/or are not undermined by 6., and if so for the latter, have been so
addressed within the manuscript
The author's recommendations for approved NHPs

• recommendations, which have been made by the author of the manuscript and involve an
NHP, are within its approved conditions of use