Peer Evaluation Form

Standard Article Evaluation Form

1. Is the title appropriate? Yes? No? Suggestion?

2. Is the abstract/resumo/resumen adequate? Yes? No? Suggestion?
(if the original article presents an introduction, objective, method, discussion/conclusion)?

3. Is the presentation of the problem/literature review adequate? Yes? No? Suggestion?
(update, contextualization, relevance, presentation of objectives)

4. Are the formal ethical aspects (e.g. approval number by the ethics committee) presented in a clear and objective manner? Yes? No? Suggestion?

5. Are materials and methods adequately presented (eg, characterization of instruments, participants, study design, statistical analysis plan)? Yes? No? Suggestion?

6. Are the results described in a clear and adequate way (eg, do they answer the question/objectives of the study, are they easy for the reader to understand, correct use of tables, graphs)? Yes? No? Suggestion?

7. Is the discussion done in order to contemplate the current literature on the subject of the study, comparing the results obtained with those of other studies, considering limitations and future studies? Yes? No? Suggestion?

8. Do you consider the article relevant for publication in Debates in Psychiatry?

9. On a scale of 1 to 10, how relevant is this submission? (1 = irrelevant - 10 - totally relevant).

10. General comments to the author(s) - (optional)