Reviewer Guide

Search

Provide rigorous, fair, and constructive peer review

A good review helps editors make decisions and helps authors improve the manuscript, even when the recommendation is negative.

Core expectations

Maintain confidentiality and do not circulate the manuscript.
Disclose financial, personal, or academic conflicts of interest.
Accept review invitations only when the topic matches your expertise.
Submit on time or notify the editor promptly if timing changes.

Review tone and structure

Start with a concise summary of the paper and overall assessment.
Separate major issues from minor corrections.
Explain why a concern matters and, where possible, how to address it.
Keep comments specific, evidence-based, and professional.

Major comment topics

Study design, method validity, and reproducibility.
Alignment between results and conclusions.
Statistical interpretation and data integrity.
Novelty, significance, and relevance to the journal.

Minor comment topics

Clarity, organization, and writing quality.
Figure and table presentation.
Missing references or citation issues.
Formatting, terminology, and typographic corrections.

Integrity concerns

Flag suspected plagiarism, image manipulation, or fabricated data.
Note missing ethics approval, consent, or permissions where applicable.
Avoid requesting unnecessary citation of your own work.

Delvierre Publisher guidance pages are written for the role shown on the page and do not expose restricted administrative actions.