FIT CLUB ELITE
Research-Paper Reading Worksheet
Read one paper with one question in mind, then connect your notes to the passages, figures, and files you actually inspected. This worksheet brings the research-literacy guides into a single working record. It does not rate a paper automatically or supply a conclusion. Use it for non-clinical literature documentation, and preserve the difference between the authors' statements and your reading of their evidence. Every result and conclusion field starts blank.
1. Identify the work and the version
Record the paper's full title, authors, publication venue, DOI if present, and the version you accessed. Keep publication dates with their displayed labels. Check the publisher's notice area and Crossmark where provided, recording the destination and date checked. Crossref describes Crossmark as a route to publisher-supplied status updates and expressly states that its presence is not a guarantee. No visible notice, or no Crossmark button, should become an assurance that a paper has no corrections.
2. Define the question and study setting
Write the authors' research question in your own words and cite the passage supporting that account. Then record the model or dataset, comparison groups, and outcome being investigated. Keep the study setting attached to every later finding. Identify whether the article reports original observations, synthesizes other papers, or presents a method or proposal. A familiar material name does not connect a published study to a purchased item or lot.
3. Trace the design and reporting details
Locate the independent units, the reported repeats, and the units used in analysis. Record what the paper says about controls, allocation, blinding, exclusions, and sample-size rationale when relevant to its design. NIH's preclinical reporting principles provide the background for these prompts; their presence here does not establish that a paper follows them. Distinguish a reported procedure from an accessible result. If a detail cannot be found, name the sections checked and leave the question open.
4. Build a finding-to-evidence entry
Choose one finding relevant to your question and connect it to the exact figure, table, or results paragraph. Record its direction, reported estimate, uncertainty description, and statistical comparison where provided. Keep graph labels and caption definitions with the entry. PLOS One's publication criteria call for appropriately described analyses and conclusions supported by data; these are publisher criteria, not proof that any particular result is correct. Repeat the block for additional findings rather than combining unlike outcomes.
5. Record data access and disclosures
Follow the data availability statement and supporting-file references for the finding you selected. Distinguish a repository page, a downloaded file, and data you could actually inspect. Record access restrictions or unexplained columns without filling them in. PLOS's data policy describes underlying data, supporting files, and restricted-access cases in its own publishing context; it does not verify any paper's deposit. Record funding and competing-interest disclosures separately, without treating either their presence or absence as a verdict on the finding.
6. Write an evidence-bounded reading note
Describe what the inspected material supports in this study setting, then list what remains unresolved. Separate limitations the authors report from questions raised during your reading. Include an alternative explanation only when you can explain its basis; uncertainty is not evidence that the alternative is true. State which additional record could change your interpretation. A single paper does not establish a literature-wide conclusion, and this worksheet does not verify any supplier's material.
7. Professional-review limitation
This worksheet is a literature-reading record, not peer review, statistical validation, or professional scientific advice. If an institutional decision depends on study design, analysis, or interpretation, obtain review from an appropriately qualified research or statistical professional with access to the relevant evidence. A completed worksheet does not show that the experiment was reproduced, that a result generalizes beyond its setting, or that any commercial material has been evaluated.
Source references
- NIH: Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research
- PLOS One: Criteria for Publication
- PLOS One: Data Availability
- Crossref: Crossmark
Prepared October 12, 2026. AI-assisted organizational editorial content; not independently scientifically, medically, or legally reviewed.
Non-clinical documentation aid. Not an analytical procedure, medical advice, or human or veterinary use guidance.
Editorial policy / Documentation questions