1. SUMMARY: You are kindly asked to furnish a general – but brief – summary of the manuscript. It is important for us to learn your opinions on the following aspects:
INSTRUCTIONS TO REVIEWERS
For all articles
- Is the article important?
- Will the article add enough to existing knowledge?
- Does the article read well and make sense? Does it have a clear message?
For research articles
- Originality — does the work add enough to what is already in the published literature? If so, what does it add? Please cite relevant references to support your comments on originality.
- Importance of the work to general readers and its interest to the scientific community. Please, feel free to express any concerns regarding the novelty of the research reported.
- Research question — clearly defined and appropriately answered?
- Methods — adequately described? Is the study fully reported in line with the appropriate reporting statement or checklist?
- Results — answer the research question? Credible? Well presented?
- Interpretation and conclusions — warranted by and sufficiently derived from/focused on the data? Discussed in the light of previous evidence? Message clear?
- References — up to date and relevant?
- Abstract/summary/key messages/what this paper adds — reflect accurately what the paper says?
- Documents in the supplemental files, g. checklists for reporting statements
2. CRITICAL COMMENTARIES: For each points of the paper, please indicate whether the data sufficiently support that point. Please give detailed and constructive comments (with references, whenever possible) that will help the editors to make a decision on the article and the authors to improve it.
3. OTHER COMMENTS: Please, comment on any other issues (technical, data presentation, textual changes) that are not necessarily linked to any of the specific points of the manuscript.