Home > Reviewer Instructions:

Reviewer Instructions:

Reviewer Instructions:
We would appreciate your assistance in the peer review of this manuscript.
Please read the paper carefully and include your comments on this form.

1. Reviewer Blind Comments to Author:

Please include specific, detailed comments regarding the originality,
scientific quality, relevance to the field of this journal, and presentation.
Check the need for tables and figures, and the adequacy of the references.

Note that the authors will receive a copy of these specific comments,
and a thorough evaluation of the paper is most helpful for the identification
of the work's strengths and weaknesses, especially when a revision is
necessary.
Please be as specific as possible, and indicate why a paper is (un)acceptable
and what is required to make it acceptable.
Authors especially appreciate it if you cite references supporting your
comments.

2. Reviewer Confidential Comments to Editor:

Please include any confidential comments you wish to make. Make sure that
these are consistent with your comments to the author.

Please return your report before the deadline assigned by the Editor.
If you are not able to meet the deadline, then please contact your Editor
or the Editorial Office.

Your contribution of valuable time and energy is much appreciated by the
editors and authors, as well as the readers of this journal.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Is the article within the scope of the journal?
YES __ NO __

Type of article: Review
YES __ NO __
Type of article: Section I Methodology
YES __ NO __
Type of article: Section II Systems & Programs
YES __ NO __
Type of article: Section III Experiences, Readers forum
YES __ NO __

Are the methods sound?
YES __ NO __

Does the work constitute an original contribution?
YES __ NO __

Is the work clearly presented?
YES __ NO __

Is the linguistic quality sufficient?
YES __ NO __

Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by the data?
YES __ NO __

Are the title and abstract accurate and informative?
YES __ NO __

Does the introduction satisfactorily explain the context and aims of the work?
YES __ NO __

Are the methods accurately described?
YES __ NO __

Are the figures: necessary
YES __ NO __

Are the figures: sufficient
YES __ NO __

Are the figures: of good quality
YES __ NO __

Are the tables: necessary
YES __ NO __

Are the tables: sufficient
YES __ NO __

Are the tables: well laid out
YES __ NO __

Do the figure legends provide sufficient information?
YES __ NO __

Are the references: necessary
YES __ NO __
Are the references: sufficient
YES __ NO __

Is the reference list in accordance with the Instructions to Authors?
YES __ NO __

Is there a financial or other conflict of interest between your work and that of the authors?
YES __ NO __


Please give a frank account of the strengths and weaknesses of the article:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Please answer the following questions as appropriate:

Will this paper have a significant impact on the field of biomechanics?
?

Is the technical treatment plausible and free of errors?
YES

Have you checked the equations?
YES

Are you aware of prior publication of this work?
NO

Should this be a short communication
YES
Search more related documents:Reviewer Instructions:
Download Document:Reviewer Instructions:

Set Home | Add to Favorites

All Rights Reserved Powered by Free Document Search and Download

Copyright © 2011
This site does not host pdf,doc,ppt,xls,rtf,txt files all document are the property of their respective owners. complaint#downhi.com
TOP