Information For Authors

Reviewer Evaluation Form for "Empirical Studies"

Title: Does the title adequately and sufficiently reflect the content of the article? Does it have up to 15 words? Does it contain a short title (5 words)?

Abstract: Does the abstract contain an introduction to the problem, objectives, method, and main results, as well as theoretical/practical implications? Is it accurate, complete, independent, concise, and specific? Is it accurate, complete, independent, concise, and specific? Does it have between 150 and 200 words?

Introduction: Does the work fill a research gap in the area and make a relevant scientific contribution? Is the study original? Are all citations referenced in the text? Are the study objective(s) precise and achievable? Are the hypotheses/guiding questions precise and based on the scientific literature? Does the text contain contextualization of the research? Does the work require the insertion of a contextualization subsection? Method: Does the Method section describe the methodological design adopted? Are the methodological strategies adopted appropriate to achieve the objective(s)/hypothesis testing/obtaining answers to the guiding questions of the study? Does the Method section adequately describe the sampling process, inclusion and exclusion criteria for participants, sample type, and participant characteristics? Does the Method section adequately describe the data collection procedures? (application of the instrument, year/period of collection, time, means and place of collection, return rate (in the case of questionnaires), loss of participants. Does the text show the quality of the measurement tools used in the research? Specifically, does it mention the reliability of the original measures and the ones used in the study, how well the measures fit the data, the number of items, any factors or dimensions, examples of items, and the response scales? In the case of quantitative research instruments, does the text present the name of the original instrument and the authorship with the year of publication? In the case of a one-dimensional instrument, does the text present the total number of items and an example of an item? In the case of a two-dimensional or multidimensional instrument, does it present the number of items for each dimension/factor and an example of an item/factor for each dimension? Does the text show information about the quality of the research tool used, like how reliable it is based on original measures and the study's results? Does it include details like fit indices, the number of items, the factors or dimensions involved, examples of items, and the response scales? In the case of qualitative research instruments (individual interview script, focus group, observation protocol, etc.), does the text present a description of the process of constructing the data collection instruments and present the items or questions used in data collection? In the case of using secondary data, does it include the origin, form of access, and reliability of the data? Are the instrument(s) selected for the study aligned with the theoretical and conceptual frameworks presented in the introduction of the article? Does the Method section adequately describe the data collection procedures? Does the Method section adequately describe the data collection procedures? Does the Method section adequately describe the data analysis procedures? In the case of a quantitative study, does the text include testing the statistical assumptions and statistical analyses used? In the case of a qualitative study, does it include a description of the technique(s) for analysis, synthesis, and interpretation of results? Does the Method section describe the ethical procedures adopted?

Results: Is the Results section presented in a way that meets the objective(s) of the study or reports the results of the hypothesis tests? Do the Figures and Tables comply with APA standards (latest edition)?

Discussion: Is the Discussion section conducted appropriately and aligned with the stated objective(s) and hypotheses/Guiding Questions? Is the Discussion conducted in a well-founded manner and aligned with theoretical and methodological frameworks? Does the Discussion include the authors' positions? Does the Discussion adequately present the limitations, theoretical/methodological, and/or practical contributions of the study?

Conclusions: Are the conclusions/final considerations (if this section exists or is necessary) strictly based on the study's findings, and do they summarize the main findings and discussion? Does the manuscript adequately present its limitations, theoretical/methodological, and/or practical contributions?

 

Reviewer Evaluation Form for "Literature Review and Meta-Analysis Studies"

Title: Does the title adequately and sufficiently reflect the content of the article? Does it have up to 15 words? Does it contain a short title (5 words)?

Abstract: Does the abstract contain an introduction to the problem, objectives, method, and main results and implications? Is it accurate, complete, independent, concise, and specific? Is it between 150 and 200 words long?

Introduction: Does the text identify the type of review performed (systematic, integrative, narrative, or other, with or without meta-analysis)? Does the work make a relevant scientific contribution? Does the work fill a research gap in the area? Does the review/meta-analysis address a topic that has already been the subject of this type of study? If so, do the authors explain how their article differs from previous works? Does the text present justification(s) for the review/meta-analysis in the context of existing knowledge on the topic? Does the text present the objective(s) or question(s) addressed in the review/meta-analysis? Are the objective(s)/question(s) of the study precise and achievable? Does the work fill a research gap in the area and make a relevant scientific contribution? Are all citations referenced in the text? 4. Method: Does the text mention the type of literature review performed? Does the text justify the choice of the type of review used? Does the manuscript specify the protocol(s) or guidelines utilized for the review/meta-analysis? Does the text describe the procedures for searching and selecting articles? Does the manuscript specify the databases and other sources utilized during the article search? Did the study use three or more databases in the search for articles, aiming to increase the representativeness of the sample of articles? Does the text provide justifications for the choice of the databases chosen for the searches? Does the text specify all data sources (databases, registries, websites, organizations, reference lists, and other sources) that were searched or consulted to identify studies? Does the manuscript present and justify the period covered by the searches? Does the text present the complete search string, with key expressions, Boolean operators adopted, and other relevant information about the searches? Does the text present the search strategies used for all search sources? Does the text describe the procedures for defining and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies? Does the manuscript explain whether judges participated in the search and eligibility analysis stages of the articles? If so, does the text mention how many judges participated in these stages, what their contributions were, and how they calculated the degrees of agreement between the judges? Does the text explain how the quality of the primary studies was assessed in terms of the robustness of the research designs, adequacy of the methods, reliability, consistency, and validity of the findings/conclusions? Does the text show how the authors dealt with the risks of possible bias in primary studies? Does the Method section adequately describe the procedures for analyzing articles? Does the text indicate what content was extracted from the articles? Does the text enumerate and specify all the variables that the researchers sought data on, such as participant characteristics and intervention methods? Does the manuscript explain the process of combining the extracted data using both qualitative and quantitative strategies? Does the text disclose the use of any software or protocol to facilitate the analysis and synthesis of the findings?

Results: Is the Results section presented in a way that meets the objective(s) or answers the study question(s)? Does the text present and describe the flowchart of the steps for selecting articles? Does the text justify the exclusion of articles that appeared to meet the inclusion criteria in the previous stages of selecting them? Does the text describe the main characteristics of the articles that made up the final sample of articles? Does the text present a global synthesis of the empirical evidence? Are the Figures and Tables in accordance with APA standards and in an editable format?

Discussion: Is the Discussion conducted appropriately and aligned with the stated objective(s) and hypotheses/guiding questions? Does the Discussion summarize the main findings of the study? Does the text discuss possible biases associated with primary studies? Does the manuscript discuss the quality of the evidence obtained through the analysis of primary studies? Is the Discussion conducted in a well-founded manner and aligned with the objective(s) or question(s) of the review/meta-analysis? Does the text present theoretical, practical, social/political implications of the results of the review/meta-analysis? Does the Discussion include critical positions of the authors? Does the Discussion indicate possible gaps in the reviewed field? Does the Discussion suggest an agenda for research or topics for future studies? Does the manuscript adequately present the limitations of the primary studies and the review/meta-analysis?

Conclusions: Are the conclusions/final considerations strictly based on the study findings?