Review form of paper submitted for publication in Annales UMCS Sec. B, vol. … (20… )
Title of the manuscript:………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1. Title of the manuscript a) correctly formulated and adequate to the contents b) should be changed (possible suggestion*) 2. The aim of the study a) properly and clearly defined b) needs to be specified (possible suggestions*) c) poorly or unclearly defined d) not defined 3. Assessment of source materials a) satisfactory b) unsatisfactory (justify*) 4. Statistical methods a) properly selected b) improperly selected c) can be accepted after taking the reviewer’s comments into consideration d) not used though essential 5. Illustrative materials (tables and figures) a) proper number and quality b) wrong quality of figure No….. c) illustrative material improperly selected d) illustrative material insufficient 6. Interpretation of results a) correct b) can be accepted after taking the reviewer’s comments into consideration c) incorrect (justify*) 7. Literature selection a) properly selected and listed b) incomplete, important bibliographic items are lacking c) improper selection of literature 8. Abstract a) adequate b) not characterizing the manuscript essence c) should be completely revised 9. Assessment of language and terminology a) good b) corrections necessary (comments in the text*) c) requires thorough corrections
*
Reviewer’s comments on the reverse
10. Assessment of the manuscript from the factual and formal aspects a) contributes new scientific values b) is a valuable contribution c) is a valuable confirmation of existing ideas d) does not contribute new scientific values (justify*) 11. Should the manuscript be shortened ? a) yes b) no 12. General opinion about the possibility of publication of the manuscript a) can be published as submitted b) can be published after minor revision c) can be published after major revision d) should not be published Reviewer’s comments:
……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………. Date …………………………….. Signature of the Reviewer
The review is anonymous. It will be given to the Author(s) of the manuscript without name of the Reviewer.