The Journal of Biomedical Science (JBS) relies on the expertise and commitment of peer reviewers to maintain the highest standards of scientific publishing. Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and with constructive feedback that benefits both the authors and the wider scientific community.

This page provides detailed guidance for reviewers regarding responsibilities, ethical expectations, and the review process.

1. Role of Reviewers

Reviewers are entrusted to:

• Provide objective, unbiased, and timely evaluations of manuscripts.
• Assess the manuscript’s originality, scientific quality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field.
• Offer constructive feedback that supports authors in improving their work, even in cases of rejection.
• Identify potential ethical concerns, plagiarism, or data irregularities and report them confidentially to the editor.
• Maintain the confidentiality of the review process.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

2.1 Before Accepting a Review Invitation

• Ensure that the manuscript falls within your area of expertise.
• Confirm that you can provide a thorough and timely review (usually within 2–3 weeks).
• Decline the invitation if you have a conflict of interest (personal, professional, or financial) with the authors or subject matter.

2.2 During the Review

• Read the manuscript carefully and evaluate all sections, including abstract, methodology, results, discussion, and references.
• Assess the manuscript for:
  • Originality – Is the work novel and significant?
  • Scientific Soundness – Are methods appropriate and reproducible?
  • Clarity – Is the manuscript well-structured and clearly written?
  • Ethics – Are ethical guidelines for human/animal studies and informed consent followed?
  • Relevance – Does the work fit within the scope of JBS?
• Provide specific, evidence-based comments, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses.
• Suggest revisions that could improve the manuscript without imposing unnecessary burdens.
• Make a recommendation (accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject) supported by justification.

2.3 After Completing the Review

• Submit your comments via the online submission system by the deadline.
• Indicate whether you would be willing to re-review a revised manuscript.
• Keep the review and manuscript content strictly confidential, even after submission.

3. Structure of Reviewer Feedback

To maintain consistency, reviewer reports should typically include:

1. Summary of the Manuscript – Briefly restate the main objective and contribution of the paper.
2. Major Comments – Critical issues affecting the validity, methodology, or interpretation of results.
3. Minor Comments – Suggestions for clarity, organization, style, or reference updates.
4. Recommendation – Final judgment (accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject).

4. Ethical Considerations for Reviewers

• Confidentiality: Do not share or discuss the manuscript with others.
• Objectivity: Base your review on scientific merit, not personal beliefs or competitive interests.
• Conflict of Interest: Disclose any competing interests to the editor immediately.
• Respect: Frame feedback constructively and professionally; avoid dismissive or harsh language.
• Misconduct Detection: Notify the editor of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate submission, or unethical practices.

5. Reviewer Recognition and Benefits

At JBS, we value the time and expertise of reviewers. Benefits include:

• Formal acknowledgment of your contribution (annual reviewer recognition).
• Certificate of Reviewing upon request.
• Opportunities to be considered for Editorial Board membership.
• Contribution to advancing biomedical research and maintaining the integrity of scientific literature.

6. Support for Reviewers

The editorial office provides:

• Clear timelines and reminders for review deadlines.
• Guidance on using the online submission system.
• Access to journal policies and ethical guidelines.
• Direct assistance via the Contact Us page for technical or procedural queries.

Peer reviewers are essential partners in the mission of the Journal of Biomedical Science. By providing careful, fair, and constructive evaluations, reviewers ensure that the journal publishes only high-quality, ethical, and impactful research that advances biomedical knowledge worldwide.