You are on page 1of 2

4701 Introduction Peer Review Guidelines Ronak Patel Peer Review on Ajay Naran Read your peers introduction

and check if it has the following important elements:

1. Does the introduction engage readers' interest by giving a general context to the study and establishing the significance and centrality of the research area? The writer does a good job introducing the purpose of stem cell technologies and how far the field has advanced to someone who has no knowledge of it. An example is mentioned in the first paragraph but perhaps explain in another sentence the terminology of cardiomyocytes or osteomyocytes? 2. Does the introduction selectively summarize previous research? Previous studies are touched upon. Detail of what is being studied in the research now should be elaborated upon. Specifically, after the first sentence in the second paragraph. 3. Does it demonstrate the need for the current study by pointing out a gap in the previous research? Yes, writer mentions that stem cells are not understood in terms of their differentiation pattern. 4. Does it assert that the current study will fill the gap? Yes, writer explains in detail how his research is different and will explain what other research does not. Provides timeline of 18 days that will observe the stem cells. 5. Are all the abbreviations and scientific terms spelled correctly? Introduction is formal and includes correct terms and abbreviations. Good job. 6. Is the citation style consistent throughout the Introduction? Not necessarily but he mentions they are included in the annotated bibliography which is fine for this case. (Mentions Fridley but not citations) 7. Is the overall organization of the introduction logical and easy to follow?

The introduction was easy to follow. Some terminology was difficult simply because Im not an expert in the field.