The manuscript is a confidential document. Please do not discuss it - even with the author.

As a reviewer you will be advising the editor, who makes the final decision. The editor's decision and any other reviewer comments will be available for viewing on Bench>Press.
Guidelines on obtaining feedback on your review.

We will pass on your report to the author; please do not make any comments that you do not wish the author to see. Please do not enter your recommendation for the final decision in the comments for authors section, this can be made in the comments for the editor section. This section can also be used for additional, anonymous comments that will be seen by the editor only.

Even if we do not accept a paper we would like to pass on constructive comments that might help the author to improve it. Please give detailed comments (with references, whenever possible) that will both help the editors to make a decision on the paper and the authors to improve it.

1. Is the paper important?

2. Is the work original? Does the work add enough to what is already in the published literature?

3. Is there a clear message?

4. Does the paper read well and make sense?

5. Is this journal the right place for this paper?

1. Abstract / summary - does it reflect accurately what the paper says.

2. Research question - is it clearly defined and appropriately answered?

3. Overall design of study - is it adequate?

4. Participants studied - are they dequately described and their conditions defined?

5. Methods - are they adequately described? For randomised trials: CONSORT style? Ethical?

6. Results - does it answer the research question? Credible? Well presented?

7. Tables and figures - useful? Is the quality good enough? Can some be eliminated? Are the data correct in the tables?

8. Interpretation and conclusions - are they warranted by and sufficiently derived from/focused on the data? Message clear?

9. References - are they up to date and relevant? Any glaring omissions?