DMJ Archive Login Register My Manuscripts Contact

Peer Review Checklists for Reviewers

I. General

1. Is it clear what the authors want to communicate and the direction of the manuscript?
2. What contribution does the article make to the field of study?
3. Is the study presented sufficiently unique?
4. Is the English language of sufficient quality?
5. Is the quality of the figures and/or tables satisfactory?
6. Are ethical guidelines adhered to? Explicitly considering both: animal and human subjects; national and institutional standards.

II. Detailed

1. TITLE
1) Does it express clearly what the manuscript is about?
2) Does it highlight the importance of the study?
3) Does it contain any unnecessary description?

2. ABSTRACT
1) Is it a short and clear summary of the aims, methods, important findings and conclusions?
2) Does it include enough information to stand alone?

3. INTRODUCTION
1) Does it clearly summarize the current state of the topic?
2) Does it address the limitations of current knowledge in this field?
3) Does it clearly explain why the study was necessary?
4) Does it clearly define the aim of the study and is this consistent with the rest of the manuscript?

4. METHODS
1) Are the study design and methods appropriate for the research question?
2) Is there sufficient power and appropriate statistics?
3) Do you have any ethical concerns?

5. RESULTS
1) Are the results presented clearly and accurately?
2) Do the results presented match the methods?
3) Have all the relevant data been included?
4) Is the data described in the text consistent with the data in the figures and tables?

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
1) Do the authors logically explain the findings?
2) Do the authors compare the findings with current findings in the research field?
3) Are the implications of the findings for future research and potential applications discussed?
4) Are any contradictory data discussed?
5) Are any limitations of the study discussed?
6) Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

7. TABLES AND FIGURES
1) Are data presented in a clear and appropriate manner?
2) Is the presentation of tables and figures consistent with the description in text?
3) Do the figure legends and table headings clearly explain what is shown?

8. REFERENCES
1) Are there any key references missing?
2) Do the authors cite the initial discoveries where suitable?
3) Do the cited studies represent current knowledge?

9. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS IN YOUR REPORT
1) A brief summary of the article and highlighted the key messages.
2) The limitations and strengths
3) Clarifying comments that which of your concerns are major or minor
4) Constructive and focused feedback on the research

Copyright© Korean Diabetes Association.
Editorial Office
101-2104, Lotte Castle President, 109 Mapo-daero, Mapo-gu, Seoul 04146, Korea
Tel: +82-2-714-9064   Fax: +82-2-714-9084   E-mail: diabetes@kams.or.kr       Business Registration Number: 106-82-31108       Name of Representative: Yoon Kun Ho      Privacy Policy      Developed in M2PI