Structured PREreview of Ancient Pathogen Genomics in Africa – Current Evidence and Future Directions

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Yes

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Highly appropriate

The preprint is a narrative review, and the literature gathered was well organized and clear.

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Highly supported

Yes, the conclusions were not overreaching and were well supported by current data.

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

Highly appropriate and clear

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Very clearly

The current evidence on ancient pathogen genomics were outlined cohesively, and while the future direction of the authors as regards the paper itself was not mentioned, as it is a narrative review, the future projections for ancient pathogen genomics were well explored.

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

Highly likely

Would it benefit from language editing?

No

Minor typing and grammatical errors, but they do not impact clarity.

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, it’s of high quality

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

Yes, after minor changes

After correcting the typo errors alluded to earlier.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The authors declare that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.