Procedure
These notes explain the editorial procedures used by RSM Press for handling submitted manuscripts and should assist you in preparing your report.

Manuscripts submitted to an RSM Press journal are examined by the Editor-in-Chief; those requiring further scrutiny are subject to peer review using one or two referees. As one of the referees you are requested to provide critical advice, primarily to the editorial team but also to the author. Generally we ask you for two comments: one is for confidential advice to the editor, and the second is for the benefit of both the editor and the author.

When providing your comments please take note of the following:

Things to consider
Content
Does the manuscript present material of current clinical and biochemical relevance?

Originality
Are the results, methods and interpretation original and sufficient to warrant publication? If they are not original please provide the appropriate reference(s).

Scientific reliability
Do you consider the study's design, choice of patients and samples, and methods chosen reliable?

Results
Are the results relevant, credible and well presented? Have appropriate statistical techniques been applied?

Figures and Tables
Are there an appropriate number of figures and/or tables for the text and are they relevant and of a satisfactory quality?

Discussion and Conclusion
Is the interpretation substantiated by the results and is it clearly and succinctly presented?

References
Are the references relevant, adequate and up-to-date?

Priority
Should the manuscript be treated as a priority for publication?

Further Comments
Do aspects of the submission require further assessment (statistical, specialist etc.)?

Other information
Sections of minimal scientific interest, unsound reasoning or discursive, over-speculative or unclear sections of text should be marked on the manuscript. Occasionally the advice of the referee is not in accord with the final editorial decision. This may reflect conflicting advice or subsequent and acceptable revision by the author. Please feel free to discuss the merits of the paper with the Editor.

Thank you for your assistance.