Reviewer Resources
JCSR provides reviewers with tools and guidance to ensure consistent, efficient, and ethical evaluations. Our resources support reviewers across disciplines and help maintain high review standards.
Support for reviewers
Resources include structured review templates, ethical guidance, and clarity on journal expectations. Reviewers can access support from the editorial office when complex issues arise.
Templates
Structured review forms
Ethics Guide
Conflicts and confidentiality
Criteria
Evaluation standards and rubrics
Communication
Decision letter support
Data Expectations
Availability and reproducibility
Updates
Policy changes and reminders
Editorial Support: The editorial office can clarify policy questions and provide guidance on complex methodological or ethical concerns.
Training Opportunities: Periodic webinars and updates help reviewers strengthen evaluation skills and stay aligned with publishing standards.
Consistency: Using structured templates improves decision consistency across diverse scientific domains and ensures fair treatment of all submissions.
Structured evaluation steps
Review checklist highlights:
- Assess alignment with journal scope and relevance.
- Evaluate methodological rigor and data transparency.
- Confirm appropriate statistical analysis and reporting.
- Check figures and tables for clarity and accuracy.
- Review ethical approvals and consent statements.
Confidentiality and conflict handling
Reviewers should disclose conflicts promptly and keep all materials confidential. Ethical concerns should be communicated to the editorial office for guidance.
What a strong review looks like
High quality reviews include a brief summary, a list of major issues, and specific minor edits. Clear structure helps editors make consistent decisions and supports author revisions.
Improve consistency and efficiency
Templates help reviewers provide consistent feedback across sections such as methods, results, and discussion. Following the template ensures that major scientific issues are addressed systematically.
When to alert the editor
Report potential red flags such as image manipulation, missing ethics approvals, or inconsistent data. Early alerts help preserve scientific integrity.
Ask questions early
If you are uncertain about a policy or data issue, consult the editorial office before submitting your review. Early questions help avoid delays and ensure appropriate handling.
Add discipline context
Use the reviewer templates as a guide but include discipline specific insights where relevant.
