Checklists for Writing a Scientific Manuscript 14- 15
Checklist for a Good Review
This checklist is adapted from the guidelines presented in the chapters of this notebook on writing sections of a scientific art icle. The items followed by an asterisk were taken from “Review Criteria for Research Manuscripts,” Academic Medicine 76:9, 2001. Use this checklist when you review a manuscript for a co-author or another colleague (and when you write a manuscript of your own). Make sure your suggestions are specific, thorough, and constructive. Depending on your role in the collaboration and your agreed-upon responsibilities as a co-author, some of the items in the checklist will be beyond the scope of your review.
Overall Manuscript
▪ Clearly and completely tells “story” of research and findings.
▪ Is written in clear, grammatically correct language.
Title
▪
Is clear and informative.*
▪
Reflects importance of study.*
▪
States study’s main findings.
▪
Names main factors studied.
▪
Uses key terms for indexing.
▪
States species studied and type of study.
Abstract
▪
Summarizes entire paper.
▪ Is consistent with manuscript and contains no additional information.*
▪ Gives basic background information that led to development of study.
▪
States gap in knowledge study will fill.
▪
States specific purpose of study.
▪ Mentions experimental approach used and identifies important tests performed.
▪ Mentions most important results and states a result for each method described in abstract.
▪ States conclusion that can be drawn from most important results and how it relates to study’s purpose.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software