Etiquette objectives | To read the journals’ recommendations to reviewers |
To provide recommendations on publication (e.g., reject/revise/publish) | |
To evaluate all appendices when available | |
Rationale | To evaluate the novelty of the study (i.e., does the trial add enough to what is already in the published literature) |
To evaluate the importance of the study (i.e., usefulness for clinical practice) | |
Methods | To evaluate if the control group is appropriate |
To evaluate the risk of bias of the trial | |
To evaluate the adequacy of the selection of participants and clinical setting | |
To check if the intervention is described with enough details to allow replication | |
To evaluate the relevance of the primary outcome(s) | |
To evaluate the reliability and validity of the outcome measures | |
Trial registration | To compare information recorded on a clinical trials register such as ClinicalTrials.gov and reported in the manuscript |
To compare information recorded in the trial protocol when provided by the authors and reported in the manuscript | |
Reporting guidelines | To check if the items requested by the CONSORT statement are adequately reported by authors |
To check if items requested by the CONSORT extensions (e.g., cluster, non-pharmacologic treatments etc.) are adequately reported when appropriate | |
Ethic | To check if the study reported ethics review board approval |
Statistics | To evaluate the adequacy of statistical analyses |
To check the sample size calculation | |
Results | To search for any inconsistencies or errors in the manuscript |
To search for any attempt to distort the presentation or interpretation of results (e.g., data “beautification”, spin, selective reporting) | |
To check if all outcomes are adequately reported (results for each group, and the estimated effect size and its precision such as 95 % confidence interval) | |
To check if all adverse events are adequately reported (participant withdrawals due to harms, absolute risk per arm and per adverse event type, grade, and seriousness) | |
Discussion | To evaluate if the discussion is consistent with the results |
To check if the authors referenced all important studies | |
To check that limitations are adequately reported | |
To discuss the results in relation to other studies | |
Conclusion | To determine whether the manuscript conclusion is consistent with the results |
Fraud | To search for plagiarism or imitation in the paper |
To evaluate if the manuscript can be suspected of fraud | |
Figures tables | To check if all figures and tables are consistent with the text |
To evaluate whether figures and tables can be understood without having to refer the text | |
References | To evaluate if authors respect the requested format for references |
Presentation | To evaluate the adequacy of the language (grammar, style, misspelling) |
To evaluate clarity of presentation | |
Abstract | To check if the authors reported all important outcomes and adverse events in the abstract |
To evaluate if the abstract conclusion is consistent with the results |