Clear and comprehensive communication of the topic, with precise molecular and clinical context
Research question is sharply stated, focused on two therapies and directly tied to measurable clinical endpoints
Methodological rationale is generally sound but lacks full completeness (no normality tests, some data estimated rather than raw)
Consistently relevant and expertly integrated source material, with reconstructed tables and interpreted statistical outputs
Accurate and consistent use of specialised terminology and concepts, supported by a clear glossary
None significant; both strands meet the highest descriptor
Excellent synthesis of molecular mechanisms with clinical data in both analysis and evaluation
Well-structured, coherent argumentation with quantitative support, clearly tied to the research question
Occasional statistical oversights (no normality tests, estimated data points) and some unsupported speculative claims prevent elevating into the topmost band
Clear IB-style structure with logical headings, tables and figures integrated sequentially
Complete inclusion of title page, contents, word count and page numbering
Inconsistent citation styles, duplicated figure captions and misaligned tables
Formatting lapses in equation layout and list numbering indicate uneven application of layout conventions