This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert J. Goldberg, PhD; James E. Dalen, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1997;157(4):380-382.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

WHILE SERVING as associate editor and editor, respectively, of the Archives of Internal Medicine, as well as having served on the editorial boards of several other journals, we have noted an uneven quality of reviews of manuscripts by clinicians and researchers who are called on to provide peer review. Given the variation in the quality of these reviews and the often limited or nonconstructive feedback that some reviewers provide to authors, we have prepared a checklist of points to consider in reviewing the major study designs commonly used in clinical and public health studies, namely observational studies, cross-sectional studies, and randomized controlled trials. We hope that this will help to improve the reviews of manuscripts, provide relevant feedback to authors, and assist those involved in planning, conducting, and reporting the results of these studies. Each of the major study designs used in clinical and epidemiological studies is discussed in the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Department of Medicine University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester, MA 01655; Tucson, Ariz

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?