Evaluation form


In line with review policies, JOHOE has prepared the following form for reviewers. This form will be visible when the reviewers login into their account and accept the article's judgment.

 

1. Is the subject repetitive. Please make a comment.

2. Is the title appropriate and concise? Does the title match the scope of the journal?If you have any suggestions please explain them.

3. Are the keywords coherent with the subject of the article? Please make a comment.

4. Are they correct and in accordance with MeSH? Please make a comment.

5. Does the introduction include a reasonable description of background, importance, and research necessity, and study propose(s)? Please make a comment.

6. Is the method and the material section of the article precisely stated? Please make a comment.

7. Does the section include a definitive description of the investigation population? Please make a comment.

8. Is the sample size formula stated in the method and material section? Please make a comment.

9. Are the variables, measurement tools, and their ranges fully stated in the section? Please make a comment.

10. Does the section include a definitive description of the Data collection method? Please make a comment.

11. Does the sample size comply with the guidelines in terms of number or volume? Please make a comment.

12. Does the section include a definitive description of the sampling method? Please make a comment.

13. If there was any lack of information or mistake in the study please explain it: 

14. Does the section include a definitive description of statistical analysis? Please make a comment.

15. Is the statistical analysis properly selected and stated? Please make a comment.

16. Are the results fully stated? Please make a comment.

17. Do the results completely describe the aim(s) of the study? Please make a comment.

18. Is the statistical tests properly performed? Please make a comment.

19. Are the Figures, tables and diagrams appropriate and contain sufficient information for clarity?And do they contain sufficient information for clarity?  Please make a comment.

20. Are the tables and the pictures coherent with the results? Please make a comment.

21. Are the results of the main objective stated at the beginning of the discussion? Please make a comment.

22. Have the study results interpretation and their shortcomings been clearly described and does this part of the manuscript compare the study’s data with previously published papers in this regard and address their similarity and differences? Please make a comment.

23. Have the appropriate interpretations of the results been made in the discussion section? Please make a comment.

24. Are suggestions being made about future research into this topic/phenomenon? What does the researcher consider the way forward? Please make a comment.

25. Are the references up to date? Please make a comment.

26. Are references and abstracts based on the format of the journal?