Different peer reviewers pay attention to different thing in the manuscripts. Here is what I care about and pay a particular attention to.
- Is the ‘omics data uploaded into any of the public repositories (e.g. PRIDE)?
- Is the statistical analysis done correctly and the corresponding claims and conclusions of the manuscript are well substantiated?
- Is it possible to reproduce the data analysis and arrive at the same conlusion?
Things that I tend not to weigh heavily.
- Novelty. I believe putting too much weight for novelty (occasionally compromising quality of work) has brought us to the situation that we are now - “irreproducible research”.
- Significance.
- Significance is a rather dynamic concept for me. Whatever is not significant today can be significant tomorrow.
- Due to my rather narrow expertize I tend not to judge others by importance and significance of their work.