Manual Review
Manual review lets you work through the checklist yourself, item by item, and have the module compute a recommendation from your answers.
The review flow
After the study type is determined and you select manual review, the module:
- Fetches the checklist for that study type from the data service
- Presents the items one set at a time, each as a yes/no judgement
- Lets you answer every item
- Computes the result when you click Calculate Results
For each checklist item, you record whether the manuscript adequately addresses it -- yes (addressed) or no (not adequately addressed).
The Calculate Results button is disabled until every item has been answered. This ensures the recommendation is based on a fully-completed checklist.
How answers map to issues
When you calculate results, the module sorts every unmet item (answered "no") into a severity bucket based on its category:
- If category is minor -- added to minor issues
- If category is major -- added to major issues
Items answered "yes" are considered satisfied and do not generate issues.
The escalation-to-reject rule
After sorting, the module applies an escalation rule:
If the number of major issues is 3 or more, OR any major issue concerns "bias" or "design", then all major issues are escalated to REJECT.
A manuscript with three or more major gaps, or with a major gap relating to bias or study design, is escalated from "major revisions" to "reject" -- reflecting that fundamental design or bias problems are not fixable by revision alone.
The recommendation
The final recommendation follows from which buckets contain issues, in priority order:
| Condition | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Any reject issues | Reject -- not acceptable in current form |
| Any major issues (no reject) | Major Revisions |
| Any minor issues only | Minor Revisions |
| No issues at all | Accept |
The logic is strictly hierarchical: a single reject-level finding outweighs any number of major or minor ones.
The results display
The results panel shows:
- The overall decision (Accept / Minor / Major / Reject)
- The major issues (or reject issues) -- specific checklist items not adequately addressed
- The minor issues -- shown when there are no reject-level findings
Each listed issue is the actual checklist question that failed.
Follow-up chat
When the decision is anything other than Accept, the module automatically opens the Review Chat so you can discuss findings -- ask why an item matters, how to address a gap, or what the guideline expects. For an accept decision, no follow-up chat is opened.
Manual vs AI review
| Manual review | AI review | |
|---|---|---|
| Who judges each item | You | The AI |
| Checklist used | Study type's checklist | Same checklist |
| Issue severity | From item's major/minor category | From AI evaluation + item category |
| Recommendation scale | Accept / Minor / Major / Reject | Accept / Minor / Major / Reject |
| Best for | Careful, reviewer-controlled assessment | Fast automated first pass |
Both modes assess the same items and use the same four-level recommendation scale.