4.1 KiB
Comment taxonomy
Use this file to classify reviewer comments before drafting responses.
Severity
| Severity | Meaning | Default handling |
|---|---|---|
minor |
Presentation, clarity, formatting, citation, or small method-detail issue that does not alter the main evidence chain | Usually draftable with text change or citation placeholder |
major |
Evidence, validation, method, statistics, interpretation, or scope issue that may affect claims or editorial confidence | Requires explicit action, evidence, or author input |
blocking |
Ethics, compliance, data integrity, missing required approval, unsupported central claim, or unresolved fatal methodological issue | Do not draft a confident response without author action |
unclear |
Insufficient information to judge severity | Flag for author confirmation |
Categories
Editorial / presentation
Includes unclear writing, structure problems, missing definitions, figure readability, title/abstract mismatch, or confusing terminology.
Default strategy:
- Usually
ACCEPT_TEXTorACCEPT_FIGURE. - Revise wording, structure, legend, definition, or abstract-title alignment.
- Give section, page, line, figure, or placeholder.
Evidence / interpretation
Includes unsupported claims, overinterpretation, missing control, causal claim not justified, clinical relevance not shown, or alternative explanation.
Default strategy:
- Use
ACCEPT_EXPERIMENT,ACCEPT_ANALYSIS,SOFTEN_CLAIM,CLARIFY_EXISTING,PARTIAL, orDISAGREE. - Do not invent results.
- If evidence is absent, soften the claim and add a limitation.
Methodological
Includes missing method detail, reproducibility issue, missing baseline, missing validation, unclear sample size, software/model/version not stated.
Default strategy:
- Use
ACCEPT_TEXT,ACCEPT_ANALYSIS, orAUTHOR_INPUT_NEEDED. - Request exact method details when author notes are vague.
- Map to Methods, Supplementary Methods, protocol, code, or figure/table.
Statistical
Includes inappropriate test, missing effect size, multiple testing issue, insufficient power, missing confidence interval, unclear replicate definition.
Default strategy:
- Treat major statistical critiques as high risk until details are supplied.
- Ask for test name, replicate unit, sample size, correction method, effect size, confidence interval, and exact results where relevant.
- Do not invent p-values, confidence intervals, sample sizes, or effect sizes.
Data / code / materials
Includes missing accession number, source data unavailable, code not provided, restricted data not justified, FAIR metadata incomplete, materials availability.
Default strategy:
- Use
ACCEPT_TEXT,CLARIFY_EXISTING,AUTHOR_INPUT_NEEDED, orBLOCKING. - Request repository, accession, DOI, license, access route, or restriction reason.
- Coordinate with
nature-dataif the user asks for full data-availability wording.
Citation / positioning
Includes missing prior work, inaccurate novelty claim, wrong comparison, field context incomplete, reviewer-requested citation.
Default strategy:
- Use
ADD_CITATION,SOFTEN_CLAIM,CLARIFY_EXISTING, orDISAGREE. - Add citations only when genuinely relevant and verified.
- Do not fabricate DOI, publication year, title, journal, or authors.
Scope / feasibility
Includes requested experiments beyond scope, future-work suggestions, journal-fit concerns, transfer-related concerns.
Default strategy:
- Use
PARTIAL,OUT_OF_SCOPE,SOFTEN_CLAIM, orDISAGREE. - Acknowledge scientific value.
- Give a study-design or scope reason, offer alternative evidence, and add a limitation.
- Avoid time, funding, or convenience as the primary reason.
Ethics / compliance
Includes ethics approval missing, consent missing, animal/human-subject reporting, competing interests, image/data integrity, or permissions.
Default strategy:
- Usually
BLOCKINGorAUTHOR_INPUT_NEEDED. - Request exact approval number, institution, consent statement, reporting checklist, image-processing details, or data-integrity explanation.
- Do not draft around missing required compliance.