Cardiovascular Prevention and Pharmacotherapy

1. Examine the importance and contribution of the research in the article.
2. Assess the originality of the study.
3. Examine the quality of the English language.
4. Examine the quality of the figures and/or tables.
5. Check the adherence of ethical guidelines of CPP.
6. Summarize the main findings of the study in a short paragraph to show your understanding to the study to editor.
7. Highlight the strengths and limitations of the article, including whether it is novel and interesting, whether it has a sufficient impact and adds to the knowledge base.
8. Assess whether the article conforms to the CPP-specific author instructions.
9. Give suggestions about title, abstract: Does the title express the content clearly? Is an abstract short and clear summary of the article and does it include enough information to stand alone?
10. Check introduction if it clearly summarizes the current state of the topic, address the limitations of current knowledge in this field, and clearly define the aim of the study and is this consistent with the rest of the manuscript.
11. Carefully review the methodology, statistical errors, results, conclusion/discussion, and references.
12. Consider feedback on the presentation of data in the article, the sustainability and reproducibility of any methodology, the analysis of any data and whether the conclusions are supported by the data.

Peer review checklists for reviewers