This packet lets a second reviewer independently check the official sources and all six first-pass assessments. It evaluates public discoverability, not institutional prestige, research quality, or the private quality of services.
Reviewer declaration
Reviewer name and affiliation: __________________________________
Relevant expertise: ____________________________________________
Conflict with this institution: □ None □ Described below
Conflict note: _________________________________________________
Independence confirmed: □ Yes □ No
Public attribution consent: □ Yes □ No
First-pass summary
Duke provides a mature distributed support system spanning discovery, data stewardship, publishing rights, and preservation.
Research-data and scholarly-communication services are both established and consultation-led.
Unify manuscript preparation and journal-selection guidance into a more visible end-to-end route.
Dimension review
Confirm only when the note is supported by the cited institution-owned pages. A missing public signal means it was not discoverable in the reviewed evidence, not that the service does not exist.
A researcher can find a coherent support hub, subject expertise, and a clear route to help.
Duke Libraries expose research help, subject expertise, data, publishing, and archiving through a coherent service structure.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
The institution offers practical help with searching, evidence synthesis, citations, and research discovery.
Research consultations, guides, and citation support are easy to locate, with deeper synthesis help varying by discipline.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can find guidance for writing, reporting, publication strategy, and preparing work for submission.
Publishing and archiving routes are visible, while manuscript-preparation guidance is distributed across services.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Public support covers publishing options, open access, rights, repositories, and author-cost questions.
Scholarly communication, open access, copyright, and repository support are prominent.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can access data-management, reproducibility, research-integrity, and responsible-AI guidance.
Data-management planning, sharing, and preservation guidance cover the research lifecycle.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Help is actionable through consultations, workshops, templates, accessible pages, and current maintenance.
Consultations and direct expert contacts provide clear next steps.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Official evidence review
The official research hub connects subject specialists, guides, research help, citation tools, and publishing pathways.
Supports: Findability, Evidence, Manuscript, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
The service provides planning, organization, documentation, sharing, and consultation support for research data.
Supports: Integrity and data, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
The library links open-access, copyright, publishing, and institutional repository support.
Supports: Publishing, Manuscript
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
Independent outcome
Outcome: □ Confirmed □ Corrected
Required note: ________________________________________________________________
Official evidence supporting any correction: _______________________________________
Reviewed on (YYYY-MM-DD): __________________