You are an ad hoc reviewer for the American Journal of Epidemiology. The Editor of the journal has requested you to review a study manuscript submitted for publication in the journal (manuscript linked below). Write a critical review of the study and provide the Editor with your recommendation as to whether to publish or reject the manuscript. Your critical review MUST NOT EXCEED 1500 words; there is no minimum word requirement, as long as all the necessary components are addressed.

(FILE IS ATTACHED) AJE-00230-2022-proof-hi.pdf

Please read and use the following to assist you with assessing the study and writing your critical review. Specifically, focus on and utilize the criteria listed in "Exhibit 9-1: Issues to be considered when preparing epidemiologic reports" in Chapter 9 — and the provided questions — as guidelines to critically review the manuscript. ( pdf 2 chapter 9 )

Chapter 9 – Communicating results of epidemiological studies, from the book attached

Zaccai Article attached

Critical evaluation of an epidemiological study pdf attached

There is no set format for the review. A suggested review format may include a synopsis of the paper followed by your critical review and comments, and end with your overall assessment and recommendation on whether to accept or reject the paper.

GENERAL COMMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR WRITING A CRITICAL REVIEW:

1. Please edit your document for conciseness, clarity, and correctness.
2. Please format your document for a professional-looking presentation. If no explicit instructions are given, it is a good idea to have your documents in a “professional/eligible format” for any class. This may include the following:
   • Consistent font size (ideally font size 12 but not smaller than 11) and font type. Do not have a document with multiple font sizes and types, unless there is a deliberate reason for it.
   • Standard margins of 1” all cross (top, bottom, left, and right)
   • Left justified; no need to right justify, unless specifically instructed
   • Double or at least 1.5 line spacing; makes your document look clean, clear and easy to read.
   • Page numbering, if a document has multiple pages
   • Appropriate title and author information (may include your name, course number and/or name, year/semester, tittle of the assignment)
   • Separate paragraphs for flow of ideas and coherency
   • Spell check
3. “Critical review” of a research paper means summarizing and evaluating the research presented for soundness of methodology used for the stated research purpose and the appropriateness of the result presentation and interpretation. It does not mean criticize in a negative manner. Therefore, in a critical review is ok or that is expected to give a positive feedback, if the research is conducted, presented, and interpreted well. It is also expected that you provide feedback on areas of concerns/deficits and recommendations/suggestions for changes and/or improvement. As a subject matter or methodology expert, you give author guidance on how best to improve the paper.
4. If you provide a comment, please be specific about it. Do not simply say there may have been confounding or bias. You must be specific about where, how, and what the issue was and give the authors guidance on fixing it. It also applies to comments on writing style or errors; be specific about the section/line/paragraph that is problematic, identify the problem and suggest a solution. Do not simply say the writing needs to be fixed!
5. You must always justify your comment with facts, figures (statistics), and/or rational explanation. If you say something was done well, justify what and why was done well. If you identify a problem, be specific about what the problem was and how to address it or the changes you would like to see.
6. If you identify a problem area, make sure you really understand what the nature of the problem is and how to address it. Do not make blanket statements about bias and/or confounding without specifically noting the type of bias, how it could have occurred, where it could have occurred, and what the effect of that bias would be on the results presented. It especially does not look good, if you identify something as a problem, when in fact it is not a problem.
7. Please be professional in your review and comments.