REVIEWER:

The goals of peer review are 1) to help improve your peer's paper by pointing out strengths and
weaknesses that may not be apparent to the author, and 2) to help improve editing skills.
INSTRUCTIONS
Read the paper assigned to you twice, once to get an overview of the paper, and a second time to
provide constructive criticism for the author to use when revising his/her paper. Answer the
questions below. If a section does not apply, write N/A.
ORGANIZATION
• Were the basic sections (Introduction, Literature Review, Conclusion, References, etc.)
adequate? If not, what is missing?
Not all sections were provided(Nursing’s Role and Roles of other Government Agencies).
• Introduction: Can you tell the main points the author will plan to make based on
the introduction? (Background, importance, purpose statement)
The main point of this paper is to discuss the impact and importance of nursing informatics in
the healthcare system.
Literature Review: Are the main points organized in a logical fashion and supported by
evidence? What are the strengths and weaknesses?
The main points are organized in a logical fashion and supported by evidence. The strengths of
this paper was the section of ethical aspects. This section was very well detailed and provided a
lot of information. Nursing’s role and other government agencies could be improved by finding
information on them/including them.
Conclusion: Is the main argument summarized concisely, are the main points included, or is
anything left out?
The main argument in their conclusion was summarized concisely. The main points were listed
out clearly.

• Did the writer use subheadings well to clarify the sections of the text? Explain.
The writer used subheadings well to to clarify the sections of the text. The writer used individual
subheadings for each section(impact on patient, ethical issues, etc.) in the body portion of the
paper.
• Was the material ordered in a way that was logical, clear, easy to follow? Explain.
The material was ordered in a way that was logical, clear, and easy to follow. It stuck to
the sample outline provided to us, which included the introduction, the nursing
implications, and the conclusion. The subheadings were formatted/aligned correctly as
well.
CONTENT
• What points did the writer address especially well? What points were missing or could
benefit from improved explanations?
The points that the writer addressed well were the impacts of nursing and patient care and ethical
legal aspects. The writer provided sufficient amount of evidence and made them detailed. The
ANA section was short and could be improved by including more elaboration to explain how
ANA has played a role in nursing informatics. The sections of nursings’ role and government
agencies were missing.
• Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials available from the Rutgers
Library Databases? If no, what's missing?
The writer covered appropriate materials from the Rutgers Library Database.

• Did the writer make some contribution of thought to the paper, or merely summarize data
or publications? Explain.
The writer made some contributions of thought to the paper. The writer explained the importance
and came up with a proper purpose statement. The conclusion provided an explanation of the
problem and elaborated on how the problem should be improved upon by explaining how
fundraising and finding cheaper alternatives are some options.

CITATIONS
• Did the writer cite (in-text) sources adequately and appropriately? Did in-text citation
match with references? Note any incorrect APA formatting.
The writer cited most of the sources adequately and appropriately. One in-text citation didn’t
match with the references. The writer used et al. in one of the in text citations even though there
was only one author(Kleib).

• Were all the citations in the text listed in the Reference Page? Note any discrepancies.
Only one was not listed in the Reference page. The writer should include the article mentioned in
the ANA section in the reference page.

GRAMMAR AND STYLE

• Was APA style followed throughout the paper? Were there any APA problems noted?
APA was followed throughout the paper. Only problems with APA were in-text citations and not
all sources being included in the reference page.
• Were there any grammatical or spelling problems?
There weren’t any grammatical or spelling problems.
 • Was the writer’s writing style clear? Were the paragraphs and sentences cohesive? What
was the easiest part of the paper to understand? Did any portions of the paper leave you
feeling confused and why?
The writer’s writing style was clear. The paragraphs and bullet points were cohesive and concise.
The easiest part of the paper to understand was the introduction and the conclusion. None of the
portions of the paper left me feeling confused, however some of sections could have been
elaborated with more evidence.

• Were the title and reference pages formatted correctly? If not, what are the problems?
The title page and reference page were formatted correctly for the most part.