Peer reviewers are at the heart of the Journal of Cancer Research (JCR). Their expertise and dedication ensure that published research is of the highest quality, scientifically rigorous, and ethically sound. The following guidelines outline the responsibilities, expectations, and best practices for reviewers.

✦ Role of Reviewers:

Reviewers are entrusted with:

• Providing an objective, unbiased, and timely assessment of submitted manuscripts.
• Offering constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work.
• Assisting editors in making informed decisions regarding publication.

✦ General Principles:

1. Confidentiality
   • Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
   • Content may not be shared, copied, or discussed with others without editorial permission.
2. Conflict of Interest
   • Reviewers must decline a review if they have any conflict of interest (personal, professional, or financial) with the authors or subject matter.
   • Any potential conflict should be disclosed to the editorial office immediately.
3. Timeliness
   • Reviews should be submitted within the agreed deadline.
   • If unable to complete the review on time, reviewers should promptly notify the editorial office.
4. Objectivity and Respect
   • Feedback should be professional, constructive, and respectful.
   • Criticism should address the content, not the authors.

✦ What to Evaluate in a Manuscript

Reviewers are expected to critically assess:

• Relevance: Is the manuscript aligned with the scope of the journal and the field of cancer research?
• Originality & Significance: Does the work add new insights or advance existing knowledge?
• Scientific Rigor: Are the methods, experimental design, and data analysis appropriate and reliable?
• Clarity & Organization: Is the manuscript well-structured, clearly written, and free from ambiguity?
• References: Are relevant and up-to-date references included?
• Ethical Standards: Has the research adhered to appropriate ethical guidelines (e.g., human/animal studies, informed consent)?

✦ Structure of the Review Report:

A constructive review typically includes:

1. Summary: A brief overview of the manuscript’s aim and key findings.
2. Strengths: Highlighting the novel contributions or well-executed aspects.
3. Weaknesses: Identifying limitations, methodological flaws, or unclear sections.
4. Recommendations: Suggestions for improvement (e.g., additional analysis, clarifications, or restructuring).
5. Final Recommendation: Select one of the following:
   • Accept
   • Minor Revision
   • Major Revision
   • Reject

✦ Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers:

• Report suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, or duplicate submission to the editor.
• Ensure evaluations are free from bias related to nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or personal beliefs.
• Decline reviewing topics outside of their expertise to maintain quality.

✦ Reviewer Recognition:

At JCR, we value the contributions of reviewers and acknowledge their role in maintaining scientific integrity by:

• Providing formal recognition certificates upon request.
• Considering active and dedicated reviewers for Editorial Board membership.
• Highlighting top reviewers annually as part of SCICONX Publishing’s recognition program.

✦ Support for Reviewers:

Reviewers have access to:

• Clear review templates and guidelines through the manuscript submission system.
• Editorial assistance for queries related to the review process.
• Opportunities for training and resources in peer review ethics and best practices.

By adhering to these instructions, reviewers contribute to ensuring that the Journal of Cancer Research remains a trusted, impactful, and ethically responsible platform for advancing global cancer research.