Peer Review Process
All reviewers/rapporteurs are requested to adhere to the code of ethics for reviewers as described in our ethics policy, where reviewers must:
- Disclose any competing interests before agreeing to review a submission, in accordance with ICMJE recommendations.
- Evaluate each manuscript for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, political philosophy, citizenship, domicile, or the institutional affiliation of the authors.
- Revise manuscripts with reasonable speed and efficiency.
- Treat the manuscript as a confidential document.
- Conduct the review objectively and avoid any personal criticism of the author.
- Express your point of view clearly with supporting arguments.
- Inform the editor of any substantial similarities between the manuscript and any other article of which he or she is personally aware, whether published or under review elsewhere.
- Comment on ethical standards regarding the protection of patients or animals.
- Inform the editor of any suspected research misconduct (e.g., data fabrication).
Points to Consider When Examining
- Determine whether or not the manuscript falls within the jurisdiction of the journal. If you believe a manuscript does not meet this mission, please note this in your comments.
- You will evaluate the quality of the manuscript and score it based on its originality, mythology, soundness of science, and level of contribution to the field.
- You also recommend acceptance, rejection and/or revisions.
Important topics to consider during your exam are:
- Significance (clinical or otherwise) of the work.
- Appropriateness of study approach or design.
- Merit of conclusions and interpretation.
- Relevance of the debate.
- Clarity of writing and solidity of organization of the document.
- Up-to-date and relevant references.
- Adequacy of title, figures and tables.
- Detail any ethical concerns you may have.
