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? Yes ● Is the research question clearly outlined? Yes ● Is the research question justified given what is already known about the topic? Yes Methods ● Is the process of subject selection clear? No ● Are the variables defined and measured appropriately? Yes ● Are the study methods valid and reliable? To some Extent ● 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? Yes ● Are the limitations of the study fatal or are they opportunities to inform future research? Needs Future Research. Overall ● Was the study design appropriate to answer the aim? The study is basically incorrect scientifically based on Cancer as a Metabolic Disease and time and time again has been tested and have shown positive results. This study cannot be reliable and should be neglected by the cancer scientists and Biologists ● What did this study add to what was already known on this topic? It is repetitive and the key references have not been included in the study, therefore; although the topic is aimed to catch eyes, but does not add any major information to support cancer treatment or prevention. ● What were the major flaws of this article? It is repetitive, not reliable and needs future research. Many references are not reliable to be mentioned or are not useful enough in the methods and discussions.