OFFICIAL EVALUATION FORMS FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ARTICLES
Original article
Evaluation parameters
1. Relevance.
- Contributes to solving some current important problem of local, national or international order.
- Opens new perspectives to solve unresolved issues.
- It constitutes a contribution or an innovation.
Indicate any other reason why you understand that the results presented in the article are relevant.
2. TITLE
- Corresponds to the topic of the article
- Concise, understandable and informative.
- Must not exceed 15 words.
- In Spanish
- It should not include acronyms or abbreviations.
- If institution names are used, they must be official and up to date.
3. ABSTRACT
- Structured by sections.
- It has a maximum limit of 250 words.
- It includes main objectives, basic procedures used, most important results and conclusions.
- Offers a good idea of what the work is about.
- The writing is done in the third person.
4. KEY WORDS
- Concrete and representative of the semantic content of the document, both in the main and secondary contents.
- It must be tried that they are between the limits of 3 to 10.
5. INTRODUCTION
- Presents brief, clear and appropriate background information.
- Rationale for the problem.
- Clearly describes the purpose of the work.
6. MATERIAL AND METHOD
- Defines the type of research or study.
- Defines the population or study group as well as the criteria for inclusion, exclusion and elimination.
- Describes the criteria and justification for sample selection if required.
- The variables analyzed are clearly described.
- Clearly state the methods of data collection, processing and analysis used.
- The statistical method is appropriate.
- The work may be reproduced by other researchers.
- Declares the particular ethical aspects of the study.
7. RESULTS
- Exposure in accordance with the objectives of the work.
- Appropriate use of statistics (when required).
- Figures and tables highlight the relevant results without incurring in repetitions of information between them.
8. DISCUSSION
- The results of the study are critically reviewed in the light of the works published by the authors themselves or by other national and international researchers.
- It explains the scope and limitations of the results.
- Describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.
9. CONCLUSIONS
- Do not repeat the results.
- Have an adequate degree of generalization.
- Respond to the objectives of the study and are in correspondence with the results and the discussion.
10. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
- Comply with the recommendations of the Association of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style).
- Up to date; most of them from recently published work, a minimum of 50% of the last five years.
- Relevant national and international literature on the subject is represented.
11. TABLES
- The information they present justifies their existence.
- They do not repeat information already indicated in the text.
- The title of the table corresponds adequately with its content.
12. FIGURES
- They are of adequate quality.
- They are necessary and relevant.
- The feet of figures correspond properly with these.
13. OTHER ASPECTS.
- Quality of presentation in terms of writing and spelling.
- It complies with bioethical principles accepted in our society.
Conclusions of the evaluation
Title of the article:
1-Can be published as it is.
2. Can be published with minor arrangements .
3. Must be rewritten and reevaluated.
4. Not acceptable for publication.
Basis of opinion:
Evaluator's name and surname:
Date
Review article
Evaluation parameters
1- TITLE
- Corresponds to the subject of the article.
- Concise and understandable.
- In Spanish
2- ABSTRACT
- Structured by sections.
- Includes main objectives, basic procedures used, most important results and conclusions.
- Offers a good idea of what the work is all about.
- It has a maximum limit of 250 words.
4. KEY WORDS
- Concrete and representative.
5. ABSTRACT (Translation into English of the abstract with its key words)
6. INTRODUCTION
- Presents brief, clear and appropriate background.
- Importance and relevance of the topic.
- Rationale for the scientific problem giving rise to the review.
- Clearly describes the objective of the work.
- Criteria and justification for the selection of the sources consulted.
8. DEVELOPMENT
- Exposure in accordance with the objectives of the work.
- Figures and tables highlight the relevant aspects without incurring in repetitions of information.
- There is interpretation of the results indicated in the literature consulted.
- It contrasts the differences and coincidences of the analyzed studies.
- Criticism of the results of the study is made in the light of the works published by the authors themselves or by other researchers.
- It describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.
- It includes new aspects to be considered.
- Indicates or highlights the limitations or contributions of the review.
9. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS
- Respond to the objectives of the study.
- It sets out clear, concrete and relevant conclusions.
10. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
- They follow the recommendations of the Association of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style).
- Up to date; most of them correspond to recently published work.
- Relevant national and international literature on the subject is represented.
11. TABLES AND FIGURES
- The information they present justifies their existence.
- The title of the table adequately corresponds to its content.
- They are of adequate quality.
- The figure feet correspond adequately to these.
- They do not repeat information in tables and figures.
Title of the article:
Conclusions of the evaluation:
|
1. Can be published as it is. |
|
|
2. Can be published with minor arrangements. |
|
|
3. Must be rewritten and reevaluated. |
|
|
4. Not acceptable for its publication. |
Basis of opinion:
-Name and surname of the evaluator
-Date
-Clinical Case
-Evaluation parameters
TITLE
- Corresponds to the subject of the article.
- Concise and understandable
- In Spanish and English
ABSTRACT
- Structured by sections.
- Offers a good idea of what the topic is about.
- Indicates the reasons for presenting the case.
- Appropriately synthesizes the clinical case.
- It has a limit of 250 words.
- In Spanish and English.
KEY WORDS
- Concrete and representative.
- In Spanish and English.
INTRODUCTION
- Brief, clear and appropriate background information.
- Describes the purpose and reasons for reporting the case.
CASE DESCRIPTION
- It adequately describes the antecedents (family inheritance, personal pathology, non-pathology, surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, etc.) related to the case.
- Indicates the onset, evolution and current state of the condition.
- It summarizes the main clinical, laboratory, cabinet and imaging findings, highlighting those that make the picture a peculiar case.
- Indicates employee processing.
- Point out the evolution of the case.
DISCUSSION
- Analyzes and compares the main findings with those of other reported cases.
- Points out the pathology/physiopathology and its meaning.
- Describes the difficulty in establishing the diagnosis and/or treatment of the case presented.
- Discusses differential diagnoses.
- Analyzes theories or hypotheses about the implications of the findings.
CONCLUSIONS
- The conclusions are clear.
- Justify the presentation of the case.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
- They are cited according to the instructions for authors (Vancouver Style).
- Relevant national and foreign studies on the subject are cited.
- Present at least 40% from the last 5 years.
TABLES
- A maximum of two tables.
- The information it presents justifies its existence
- If abbreviations or special symbols are used, their meaning is described.
FIGURES
- A maximum of three images.
- Quality of the figures.
- Necessity and relevance of the figures.
- Graphs and diagrams.
- The data they present do not repeat information already indicated in the text.
- They're adequate. What do you define?
- Protecting the patient's identity and complies with bio-ethical principles.
- Source from which the figures and photos were taken.
FEET OF FIGURES
- The description of the figure is adequate.
- The feet correspond to the figures.
- The meaning of the abbreviations or symbols used in the figures is described.
GENERAL EVALUATION
- The subject is important.
- The article has scientific/practical/educational value.
- Complies with bio-ethical principles accepted in our society.
WORDING
- The use of abbreviations and acronyms is not excessive and does not impede fluent reading or understanding of the article.
- The meaning of the abbreviations, acronyms and symbols used is described.
- Clarity and consistency of wording.
- Syntax and spelling.
Title of the article:
Conclusions of the evaluation:
|
1. Can be published as it is. |
|
2. Can be published with minor arrangements . |
|
3. Must be rewritten and reevaluated. |
|
4. Not acceptable for its publication. |
Basis of opinion:
Name and surname of the evaluator:
-Date
-Historical Articles
-Evaluation Parameters
TITLE
-Corresponds to the topic of the article
-Concise and understandable
ABSTRACT
-Clearly indicates the objective
-Describes the methodology
-Identifies main inputs and conclusions of the work
-It has a limit of 250 words.
- Keywords (in Spanish and English).
-Concrete and representative.
INTRODUCTION
-Presents brief, clear and appropriate background information.
-Specifies the scope, originality, importance and relevance of the topic.
-Clearly describes the purpose of the work.
METHODOLOGY
-Consult primary or secondary sources
-Perform the triangulation of the sources.
DEVELOPMENT
-Correct organization and presentation of the theme.
-Criteria and justification for the selection of the articles consulted.
-It is divided into sections that facilitate the development and understanding of the subject.
-Supports primary and/or secondary sources.
-Includes a critical analysis of the sources consulted.
CLOSING REMARKS
-The conclusions respond to the objective of the work.
-Provides clear, concrete and relevant conclusions.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
-They are relevant and sufficient according to the subject under discussion
-They are quoted according to the Vancouver style.
TABLES AND FIGURES
-The number of tables and figures is not excessive, only the relevant ones.
-The data they present do not repeat information already indicated in the text.
-The information presented in the tables justifies their existence.
-The figures are necessary, pertinent and have the required quality.
-If abbreviations or special symbols are used, their meaning is described.
-Includes credits from the following figures.
OTHER ELEMENTS
-The meaning of the abbreviations, acronyms and symbols used is described and their use is not excessive.
-Quality of presentation in terms of writing and spelling.
-Compliance with ethical principles.
-The subject is important and relevant.
-Article has scientific/practical/educational/SOCIAL value
Title of the article:
CONCLUSIONS OF THE EVALUATION:
|
1. Can be published as it is. |
|
2. Can be published with minor arrangements . |
|
3. Must be rewritten and reevaluated. |
|
4. Not acceptable for its publication. |
Basis of opinion:
Name and surname of the evaluator:
Date
