Reviewer Evaluation Form
Journal: Clinical Trials and Practice (CTP)
ISSN: 2771-7380
Manuscript Information
- Manuscript ID:
- Manuscript Title:
- Article Type: (Original Research / Review / Case Report / Mini-Review / Short Communication / Other)
- Reviewer Name: (Optional / Confidential)
- Date of Review:
Reviewer Declaration
☐ I have no conflict of interest with the authors or the research.
☐ I agree to treat this manuscript as confidential.
☐ I will provide an objective and unbiased review.
Section A: General Assessment
| Criterion | Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Originality of the work | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Scientific significance | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Relevance to clinical trials and practice | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Contribution to existing knowledge | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Section B: Methodology and Data Quality
| Criterion | Yes | Partially | No |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial design is appropriate | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Methods are clearly described | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Statistical analysis is sound | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Results are reproducible | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Comments on methodology and data quality:
Section C: Presentation and Structure
| Criterion | Yes | Partially | No |
|---|---|---|---|
| Title reflects content accurately | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Abstract is clear and informative | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Figures and tables are appropriate | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| References are relevant and sufficient | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Comments on presentation and clarity:
Section D: Ethical and Regulatory Compliance
- Does the manuscript comply with ethical standards (Declaration of Helsinki, GCP)? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Not Applicable
- Are ethical approvals and informed consent clearly stated (if required)? ☐ Yes ☐ No
- Is the clinical trial registration number provided and verifiable? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Not Applicable
- If animal research is involved, are relevant approvals stated? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Not Applicable
- Any indication of plagiarism, data manipulation, or ethical concern? ☐ No concerns ☐ Potential concerns (explain below)
Ethical/regulatory compliance comments:
Section E: Strengths and Weaknesses
- Major strengths of the manuscript:
- Major weaknesses or limitations:
Section F: Comments for Authors (shared with authors)
Section G: Confidential Comments to the Editor (not shared with authors)
Section H: Recommendation
☐ Accept without revision
☐ Accept with minor revisions
☐ Major revisions required
☐ Reject
Justification for recommendation:
Final Reviewer Confirmation
I confirm that this review reflects my honest and unbiased assessment of the manuscript.
Reviewer Signature (optional): _______________ Date: _______________
