HInT Review – international HealthTechScan by EuroScan int.net.

EUROSCAN INTERNATIONAL NETWORK | INTERNATIONAL HEALTHTECHSCAN

Health Innovation and Technologies (HInT) Journal
Review

Thank you for agreeing to conduct a peer review for Health Innovation and Technologies . The following survey will guide you step by step through the review process, helping you to assess the manuscript systematically and to formulate clear, well‑structured recommendations for the authors.

Reviewer ID

Has been provided by the journal to you.

Manuscript Title

Please copy and paste the title here out of the manuscript

Manuscript ID / Submission Number

Has been provided by the journal to you.

General remarks

Some questions regarding you as the reviewer of the article and your compensation.

Conflict of Interest (COI)

No, I have no COI
Yes, I have some relevant COI

Questionnaire on specific aspects

Some specific topics. They do not necessarily fit to all articles. So please choose and mark.

Is the language of the article of sufficient quality?

	Good	Sufficient	Not sufficient	Not applicable
English	GoodEnglish Good	SufficientEnglish Sufficient	Not sufficientEnglish Not sufficient	Not applicableEnglish Not applicable
German (optional)	GoodGerman (optional) Good	SufficientGerman (optional) Sufficient	Not sufficientGerman (optional) Not sufficient	Not applicableGerman (optional) Not applicable
Other (optional)	GoodOther (optional) Good	SufficientOther (optional) Sufficient	Not sufficientOther (optional) Not sufficient	Not applicableOther (optional) Not applicable

Is the quality of the figures and tables satisfactory?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Does the reference list cover the relevant literature adequately and in an unbiased manner?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Are the statistical methods valid and correctly applied (e. g. sample size, choice of test)?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Are the methods transparent and sufficently documented (e. g. to replicate a specific setting/study)?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Are the data underlying the study available in either the article, supplement, or deposited in a repository (Sequence/expression data, protein/molecule chracterizations, annotations, and taxonomy data are required to be desposited in public repositories prior to publication)?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Does the study adhere to ethical standards including ethics committee approval and consent procedure?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Have standard biosecurity and institutional safety procedures been adhered to?

Yes
No
Not applicable

Evaluation / taxonomy

Is the following topic addressed?

	Yes	No	Not applicable
Validty of results	YesValidty of results Yes	NoValidty of results No	Not applicableValidty of results Not applicable
Reliability of results	YesReliability of results Yes	NoReliability of results No	Not applicableReliability of results Not applicable
Objectivity of results	YesObjectivity of results Yes	NoObjectivity of results No	Not applicableObjectivity of results Not applicable

Quality Assessement

	Very low	Low	Moderate	High	Very High
Originality	Very lowOriginality Very low	LowOriginality Low	ModerateOriginality Moderate	HighOriginality High	Very HighOriginality Very High
Rigorous quality standards	Very lowRigorous quality standards Very low	LowRigorous quality standards Low	ModerateRigorous quality standards Moderate	HighRigorous quality standards High	Very HighRigorous quality standards Very High
Significance to the field	Very lowSignificance to the field Very low	LowSignificance to the field Low	ModerateSignificance to the field Moderate	HighSignificance to the field High	Very HighSignificance to the field Very High
Interest to a general audience	Very lowInterest to a general audience Very low	LowInterest to a general audience Low	ModerateInterest to a general audience Moderate	HighInterest to a general audience High	Very HighInterest to a general audience Very High
Quality of the writing (appropriate language)	Very lowQuality of the writing (appropriate language) Very low	LowQuality of the writing (appropriate language) Low	ModerateQuality of the writing (appropriate language) Moderate	HighQuality of the writing (appropriate language) High	Very HighQuality of the writing (appropriate language) Very High
Overall quality of the study	Very lowOverall quality of the study Very low	LowOverall quality of the study Low	ModerateOverall quality of the study Moderate	HighOverall quality of the study High	Very HighOverall quality of the study Very High

Evaluation

Please enter here your general comments on the topic, the way the authors have handled the topics and the conclusions as well whether the text is fitting to the journal and your final recommendations.

Please summarize the main findings of the study (No table of contents, three essential core statements of the article are sufficient).

Please highlight the limitations and strengths.

Please comment on the methods, results and data interpretation. If there are any objective errors, or if the conclusions are not supported, you should detail your concerns.

Please provide your detailed review report to the editor and authors.

I recommend the following action.

Major revision
Minor revision
Rejection
Ready for publication

Additional comments

Save and Resume Later

EuroScan international network e. V.

international Health Tech Scan

A global network of publication organisations and individuals perform Horizon Scanning as part of Early Awareness in health. Our network connects, facilitates knowledge exchange and capacity building and strengthens their work to support decisions locally.

ABOUT
Who We Are
History
Goverance
Secretariat
Contact

ACTIVITIES
Horizon Scanning
Early Awareness
Reassessment
Working Groups
Publications

NETWORK

Member Directory
Partner
Join the Network
Events
Newsletter