Reviewer Resources
JRNM provides reviewers with tools and guidance to ensure consistent, efficient, and ethical evaluations. Resources help reviewers address clinical, technical, and safety considerations in nuclear medicine.
Resources Overview
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.
Available Tools
Templates
Structured review forms
Ethics Guide
Conflicts and confidentiality
Criteria
Evaluation standards and rubrics
Data Expectations
Availability and reproducibility
Ongoing Guidance
Editorial Support: The editorial office can clarify policy questions and ethical concerns.
Training: Periodic updates help reviewers stay aligned with standards.
Checklist: Structured checklists improve consistency across reviews.
Red Flags: Report possible data or ethics concerns to the editor.
Need reviewer support?
Contact the editorial office for guidance or resources.
Review Checklist
Structured evaluation steps
- Assess alignment with journal scope and clinical relevance.
- Evaluate methodological rigor and dosimetry accuracy.
- Check data availability and reproducibility statements.
- Review ethics approvals and consent disclosures.
- Confirm figures and tables are clear and accurate.
Ethics Reminders
Confidentiality and conflict handling
Report potential red flags such as data inconsistencies or safety concerns to the editorial office promptly. Ethical questions can be escalated for guidance.
Template Usage
Improve consistency
Templates help structure feedback across methods, results, and discussion. Add discipline specific insights where appropriate.
Red Flag Reporting
Protect integrity
Report suspected image manipulation, safety concerns, or data inconsistencies to the editorial office for review.
Reviewer Checklist
Key evaluation points
Check scope alignment, dosimetry accuracy, data transparency, and safety reporting. Consistent checks improve review quality.
Example Review Format
Clear structure
High quality reviews include a brief summary, major issues, minor comments, and overall recommendation. This structure supports consistent editorial decisions.
Reviewer Support
Ask questions early
If you are unsure about a policy or data issue, contact the editorial office before submitting your review.
Templates
Structured feedback
Templates help reviewers cover key methodological and safety points consistently across submissions.
Template Reminder
Stay consistent
Use the reviewer template to ensure that safety, dosimetry, and methodology are addressed consistently.
Template Use
Stay consistent
Templates help ensure that safety, dosimetry, and imaging details are reviewed consistently.
Quick Tip
Stay structured
Use the template to keep reviews consistent and complete.
Brief Reminder
Stay consistent
Follow the structured template.
