Guide to Reviewers

Dear Reviewer,

Following are the criteria for the assessment of the manuscript for review. Your objective assessment will help determine the quality and suitability of the manuscript for publication in the LASU Journal of Medical Sciences (LASU-JMS). Please see the attached “Instruction to Authors” for guidance.

Kindly return your review report within two weeks of the receipt of this request for assessment. If for any reason you are unavailable or not disposed to reviewing the manuscript, kindly communicate your decision immediately in order to forestall a delay in the review process.

Thank you for your help and commitment to the advancement of the course of LASU-JMS.



  1. Title 

Is it appropriate considering the theme of the manuscript? If not, will you like to suggest an appropriate title?


  1. Abstract

Is it adequately structured in line with the Journal’s specification? Are the contents appropriate? Is the length appropriate?


  1. Introduction 

Is the research focus appropriate? Are the aims and objectives of the study clearly stated? Is the literature review satisfactory and up to date?


  1. Materials and Methods/Study Design

Is it consistent with stated objective(s) of study? Are the methods used established procedures? Are the procedures adequately written to ensure reproducibility? If applicable, is the sampling technique and sample size right? Are ethical issues appropriately addressed, including ethical approval and/or adoption of established ethical guidelines, and informed consent in respect of human studies? Are the statistical tests for analysis appropriate?


  1. Results –

 Are the results generally correct and accurate? Are the results displayed (Tables, Figures, Diagrams, Charts etc.?) Are the methods of display effective and adequate?


  1. Discussion –Have the results been discussed adequately? Are the references relevant, current and appropriately utilized in discussing the results obtained in the study?


  1. Conclusion(s) –

Are the conclusion(s) and inferences consistent with the study design and results?


  1. References –

Do the references, as cited in-text and listed, conform to the Journal’s format, Vancouver style? Are the references accurately cited?


  1. Overall Quality

Comment on the following:

  • Literary style (syntax, punctuation, spelling etc.) –
  • Overall length –
  • Overall contribution to knowledge –


  1. Specific comment (if any):


  1. Overall Judgment (Please tick one option only):
  • Excellent
  • Good
  • Average
  • Below Average


  1. Final Recommendation (Please tick one option only):
    • Accept the paper as it is
    • Accept after minor corrections
    • Accept after major corrections
    • Unable to take a decision until corrections have been made
    • Reject the paper outright


Name and Title of the Assessor:

 Signature of the Assessor and Date:

 Address of the Assessor: