Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the quality, rigor, and integrity of publications in the Journal of Clinical and Translational Immunology (JCTI). These guidelines are intended to assist reviewers in providing fair, timely, and constructive feedback that supports both the authors and the editorial team in the decision-making process.

1. Role of Reviewers:

Reviewers are expected to:

• Provide an objective and critical evaluation of the manuscript’s originality, scientific validity, clarity, and significance.
• Ensure that the research is methodologically sound and that conclusions are supported by the data.
• Identify potential ethical concerns, including plagiarism, duplicate submission, or inappropriate use of human/animal subjects.
• Offer constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.
• Submit reviews within the agreed timeline.

2. Review Process:

2.1 Confidentiality

• Manuscripts sent for review are strictly confidential.
• Do not share, discuss, or distribute manuscript content without prior permission from the editor.

2.2 Objectivity and Fairness

• Reviews should be conducted impartially, free from personal, professional, or financial bias.
• Avoid harsh or disrespectful language. Feedback should be professional and respectful.

2.3 Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., competitive, financial, or collaborative relationships with authors). 
• If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline the review assignment.

3. Reviewer Report:

When preparing a review, consider addressing the following points:

• Title and Abstract: Are they clear, concise, and representative of the study?
• Introduction: Does it provide sufficient context and rationale for the study?
• Methods: Are the study design, data collection, and analysis methods appropriate and reproducible?
• Results: Are the findings clearly presented and statistically sound?
• Discussion and Conclusion: Are interpretations valid and supported by the data? Are limitations acknowledged?
• Figures and Tables: Are they clear, relevant, and properly referenced?
• References: Are they up-to-date, relevant, and accurately formatted?

Recommendation Options:

• Accept as is
• Accept with minor revisions
• Revise and resubmit (major revisions needed)
• Reject (with justification)

4. Ethical Considerations:

Reviewers should immediately notify the editor if they suspect:

• Plagiarism or duplication
• Data fabrication or manipulation
• Unethical research practices involving humans or animals

The editor will handle all concerns in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

5. Timeliness:

• Reviews should be completed within the specified timeframe (usually 2–3 weeks).
• If more time is required, reviewers should promptly notify the editorial office.

6. Recognition of Reviewers:

• Reviewers’ contributions are highly valued and may be recognized through acknowledgments, certificates, or optional listing on the journal website.
• Reviewer identities remain confidential unless disclosure is mutually agreed upon.

7. Contact Information:

For questions or concerns regarding the review process, please contact: editor.jcti@sciconxjournals.com