that's great, thanks for sharing! (though I'm not enough of a domain expert to know if it's accurate)
another solution to this would be if Science Advances were to require submissions to provide a "Significance Statement", like PNAS does, which would be essentially at the level of readability you provided.
another solution to this would be if Science Advances were to require submissions to provide a "Significance Statement", like PNAS does, which would be essentially at the level of readability you provided.