- Email: [email protected]
Suggestions for Consultants
SUGGESTIONS FOR CONSULTANTS There are 3 things that a consultant should address in evaluating a manuscript: 1) overriding concerns, 2) specific concerns and 3) general concerns.
ures, or just by a representative experiment or case? Are there too many figures or tables? Is there duplication of figures, tables and text? Do the results justify the effort it took to get them? Overriding concerns. The overriding concerns are whether Discussion. Are the author's conclusions supported by his the methods are of sufficient detail to be reproduced and the results are valid, significant, new and adequately presented. If results? The author should be expected to comment adequately so the paper will add something of value to the literature. The on all his results. Omissions and unsupported conclusions consultant should determine whether the study is new, signifi- should be noted. Do the authors discuss possible problems with their study and present (or rule out) alternate conclusions or cant and worthy of publication. explanations of their results? Specific concerns. It also is important for the consultant References. The consultant should note in his review whether to evaluate the various sections of the manuscript. the references are seriously outdated or if important relevant Abstract. The author should have summarized each section work by other researchers has been overlooked. of his paper with 1 or 2 concise sentences. Has the author left General concerns. General concerns are critical points that important parts of his paper out of the abstract? Has he affect the readability and meaningfulness of the entire manuincluded too much detail, making the abstract too long? Introduction. This section should explain the purpose of the script but fall short of being overriding concerns. Readability. If the author is struggling with a linguistic barpaper. The consultant should note whether the objectives were met and whether the introduction contains material unneces- rier, verbosity and vagueness the consultant should note the fact. Some consultants make grammatical corrections on the sary to the author's argument. Materials and Metlwds. Was enough information given for manuscript but this is not necessary. Redundancy. Unnecessary repetition should be pointed out. the consultant to know what was done and how it was done? Ideally, the description should be so clear and complete that a Tables, figures and figure captions in particular should be knowledgeable investigator could duplicate the study. The con- checked against the text for redundancy. sultant should look for important omissions. Equally imporPlwtographic quality. Are the figures and tables technically tant, the information should be presented in a straightforward, good or are they fuzzy, crude or uninterpretable? unconfusing manner. Re-publication and Plagiarism. A consultant should note if Results. Were there adequate controls? Are the statistical he suspects that the study or portion of the study has been methods adequate? Are the results presented in tables or fig- published elsewhere or if the author may be guilty of plagiarism.
ures, or just by a representative experiment or case? Are there too many figures or tables? Is there duplication of figures, tables and text? Do the results justify the effort it took to get them? Overriding concerns. The overriding concerns are whether Discussion. Are the author's conclusions supported by his the methods are of sufficient detail to be reproduced and the results are valid, significant, new and adequately presented. If results? The author should be expected to comment adequately so the paper will add something of value to the literature. The on all his results. Omissions and unsupported conclusions consultant should determine whether the study is new, signifi- should be noted. Do the authors discuss possible problems with their study and present (or rule out) alternate conclusions or cant and worthy of publication. explanations of their results? Specific concerns. It also is important for the consultant References. The consultant should note in his review whether to evaluate the various sections of the manuscript. the references are seriously outdated or if important relevant Abstract. The author should have summarized each section work by other researchers has been overlooked. of his paper with 1 or 2 concise sentences. Has the author left General concerns. General concerns are critical points that important parts of his paper out of the abstract? Has he affect the readability and meaningfulness of the entire manuincluded too much detail, making the abstract too long? Introduction. This section should explain the purpose of the script but fall short of being overriding concerns. Readability. If the author is struggling with a linguistic barpaper. The consultant should note whether the objectives were met and whether the introduction contains material unneces- rier, verbosity and vagueness the consultant should note the fact. Some consultants make grammatical corrections on the sary to the author's argument. Materials and Metlwds. Was enough information given for manuscript but this is not necessary. Redundancy. Unnecessary repetition should be pointed out. the consultant to know what was done and how it was done? Ideally, the description should be so clear and complete that a Tables, figures and figure captions in particular should be knowledgeable investigator could duplicate the study. The con- checked against the text for redundancy. sultant should look for important omissions. Equally imporPlwtographic quality. Are the figures and tables technically tant, the information should be presented in a straightforward, good or are they fuzzy, crude or uninterpretable? unconfusing manner. Re-publication and Plagiarism. A consultant should note if Results. Were there adequate controls? Are the statistical he suspects that the study or portion of the study has been methods adequate? Are the results presented in tables or fig- published elsewhere or if the author may be guilty of plagiarism.