Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts for methodological rigor, data transparency, and clinical relevance. Reviews should be objective and focused on improving the manuscript.

Reviews should focus on methods, data integrity, and clinical relevance. Provide clear major and minor recommendations and point to specific sections for revision. Balanced feedback helps authors respond efficiently.

Reviewers receive certificates and may be eligible for APC discounts based on service. Recognition letters can support professional development and institutional service reporting.

Manuscripts are confidential. Do not share data or use unpublished findings. Destroy manuscript files after review to protect privacy and intellectual property.

Begin with a brief summary of the work, followed by major concerns and minor edits. Comment on ethical compliance, statistical reporting, and the clinical relevance of conclusions.

If you cannot review within the timeframe or lack expertise, decline promptly so the editor can reassign. Timely declines help keep decisions on schedule.

Reviews should be free of personal bias and sensitive to trauma related topics. Focus on evidence, methods, and clarity, and avoid language that may stigmatize participants.

Use the confidential comments section for sensitive concerns, such as ethics issues or data integrity questions. This allows the editor to address issues discreetly while keeping author feedback constructive.

Confirm review invitations promptly and adhere to agreed deadlines. Timely reviews keep clinical findings moving toward publication and support author satisfaction.

Maintain a respectful, professional tone and focus on evidence based critiques. Constructive feedback improves manuscript quality and supports author development.