Content of review 1, reviewed on April 12, 2019

Abstract, title and references ● Is the aim clear? Yes ● Is it clear what the study found and how they did it? Yes ● Is the title informative and relevant? Yes ● Are the references: ● Relevant? Yes ● Recent? No ● Referenced correctly? Yes ● Are appropriate key studies included? No Introduction/ background ● Is it clear what is already known about this topic? Not Exactly ● Is the research question clearly outlined? Not Exactly ● Is the research question justified given what is already known about the topic? To some Extent Methods ● Is the process of subject selection clear? Yes ● Are the variables defined and measured appropriately? Yes ● Are the study methods valid and reliable? No ● Is there enough detail in order to replicate the study? No Results ● Is the data presented in an appropriate way? Yes ● Tables and figures relevant and clearly presented? Yes ● Appropriate units, rounding, and number of decimals? Yes ● Titles, columns, and rows labelled correctly and clearly? Yes ● Categories grouped appropriately? Yes ● Does the text in the results add to the data or is it repetitive? repetitive ● Are you clear about what is a statistically significant result? Yes ● Are you clear about what is a practically meaningful result? Yes Discussion and Conclusions ● Are the results discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being over interpreted? No ● Do the conclusions answer the aims of the study? To some extent ● Are the conclusions supported by references or results? No ● Are the limitations of the study fatal or are they opportunities to inform future research? inform future research Overall ● Was the study design appropriate to answer the aim? Yes ● What did this study add to what was already known on this topic? It is repetitive ● What were the major flaws of this article? It is repetitive, not reliable and needs future research. ● Is the article consistent within itself? No Overall statement or summary of the article and its findings in your own words

In my opinion this article should be withdraw from the journal.

Overall strengths of the article and what impact it might have in your field

The article does not have any positive or major impact in this field.

Source

    © 2019 the Reviewer (CC BY 4.0).

References

    Karsten, K., Lora, D., Elisabeth, O., Nancy, T., Erika, B., Franziska, T., C., E. J., Philipp, S., Joerg, R., Rainer, S., Wolfram, G., J., O. P., Michael, H. 2019. Identification of ADGRE5 as discriminating MYC target between Burkitt lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. BMC Cancer.