1. Being invited to review a manuscript

Reviewers are invited via website or email and asked to submit their reports. Please accept or decline this invitation as quickly as possible to prevent delays to authors, so the editors will know if they need to invite alternative reviewers.
Any manuscript sent for peer-review is a confidential document and should remain so until it is formally published.
We ask peer-reviewers to return their reports within 14 days of accepting the invitation to help support timely decisions for authors.
If you have a competing interest that may influence your comments on a manuscript, we ask that you decline the reviewer invitation. All peer-reviewers, must be able to provide independent feedback and you should decline an invitation if you have worked with any of the authors, or you feel your relationship with an author would influence or prevent you providing true recommendations on the manuscript.
If you accept to review the manuscript, you must treat the materials you receive as confidential documents. This means you can’t share them with anyone without prior authorization from the editor. Since peer-review is confidential, you also must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors and authors.

2. How to register as a peer-reviewer?
To access the paper and deliver your review, click on the link in the invitation email you received which will bring you to the submission/reviewing system, or use your user name and password to log in.

How to enter as a reviewer (download PDF)

3. Points to consider in your review
Peer-reviewers should consider the following points, which are listed in the box and elaborated on in more detail below, and indicate whether they consider any required revisions to be 'accept', 'minor modifications', 'major revision' or 'reject'.

Summary of some of the questions to consider when peer-reviewing:

1. Is the manuscript have originality and novelty? 2. Do you have any “conflict of interest (personal or professional for against the presented information)” in reviewing this manuscript? 3. Are materials & methods comprehensive and reproducible? 5. Are there any ethical or competing interests issues you would like to raise? 6. Do the results support the authors’ conclusions? 7. Have the results been presented and discussed clearly and completely? 8. Are the included additional files (Tables and Figures) appropriate? 9. Do you have any other suggestions that might help the author(s) strengthen their paper to make it more applicable to the community?

Please note that these points are intended as a guide. Each reviewer brings different and unique perspectives to the decision making process for editors, and we appreciate all insights you are able to provide.
If you have any questions about the peer-reviewing for Research Involvement and Engagement, please contact us using the ‘contact us’ or ‘email’ detailed on the top of this page.

4. What happens next?

When you submit your reviewer report you will be asked to recommend a decision of either accept, reject, minor modifications or major revisions.
Following your original peer-review and recommendation, and subsequent revisions of the manuscript by the authors, the editors may ask you to assess the manuscript again to ensure all of your points have been addressed adequately. The final decision of whether to Accept or Reject a manuscript in the journal lies with the editors.

You can also find basic training for reviewer tasks and step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript in the journal’s website through this link.

• Regarding reviewing the manuscript the following links can be helpful:

1. COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
2. ICMJE - Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process
3. WAME - Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals