Editorial checklist

1. Is there a clear focus on the MATILDA core aim throughout the article?
   1. The article consistently addresses the key question: “Why is this topic important to consider in the context of ILD research?”
   2. The content is educational, rather than descriptive or prescriptive. Hence, it is explained why a certain approach may suit certain situations better than others, rather than simply stating that this is the case, or leaving this completely implicit.
   3. The emphasis is on why presented facts or ideas are relevant to think about, rather than simply relaying facts and defined/explained jargon.
      
   4. Potential implications of neglecting the topic in ILD measurement and analysis are clearly addressed throughout the article.
   5. Practical considerations may be mentioned but are left to a minimum. For example, issues like participant burden, costs of data collection, ease of analysis are not elaborated on.
      
      
2. Is there a focus on ILD research throughout the article?
   1. An exception may be made when ILD research is juxtaposed with non-ILD research. For example, starting with discussing the more familiar cross-sectional study context, and then using this to explain the topic applied to the ILD context.
   2. An exception may be made when the topic is relevant in general (not just for ILD research), and it may be more educational to keep the explanations and related jargon more general. In this case, examples tailored to ILD are however especially important and expected.
      
      
      
3. Is the article broad enough to allow ILD researchers to draw their own conclusions about what is best for their specific research question and study area?
   1. MATILDA articles should typically not focus on one specific substantive context, but on more generally applicable content. For example, “the best sampling designs for studying depression” or “designing items for measuring sleep” are not as suited for MATILDA. More appropriate are articles like “types of semi-random sampling designs for ILD”, or “designing items for rare events”.
   2. MATILDA articles should be about topics that are relevant for a considerable portion of ILD researchers. Niche topics are better mentioned within a broader article, with links/references to empirical studies that expand on it.
      
      
4. Is the article specific enough, and is the topic discussed efficiently?
   1. The length of an article will typically be ~1500-3000 words (including example boxes and figures, excluding references). Longer content should probably be divided into multiple articles.
   2. If multiple topics are covered, this may warrant multiple articles (or a different article title).
   3. The article should link to relevant MATILDA articles (instead of explaining everything in this article); this may require additional (new) articles.