The SCICONX Journal of Immunity and Infectious Diseases (JIID) depend on the expertise, fairness, and dedication of its reviewers to maintain the highest standards of scientific publishing. Peer review is the cornerstone of academic quality, ensuring that only robust, ethical, and meaningful contributions are disseminated to the global community.

This page outlines the expectations, responsibilities, and procedures for reviewers, guiding them to provide evaluations that are constructive, impartial, and timely.

1. Role of Reviewers

As a reviewer, you serve as both a critical evaluator and a constructive mentor. Your primary responsibilities are to:

• Assess the scientific validity, originality, and significance of the manuscript.
• Provide clear, evidence-based comments that help authors improve their work.
• Identify ethical or methodological issues, including plagiarism, data concerns, or inappropriate claims.
• Recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected, while leaving the final decision to the editorial team.

2. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers must adhere to the highest ethical standards:

• Confidentiality – Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and should not be shared or discussed outside the review process.
• Impartiality – Reviews should be fair, unbiased, and free from personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest.
• Respect – Feedback must be constructive, avoiding dismissive or disrespectful language.
• Integrity – Reviewers should notify editors immediately if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, or ethical violations.

3. Structure of a Review Report

Reviewers are encouraged to organize their comments into major and minor sections for clarity.

a) General Overview

• Briefly summarize the manuscript’s objective, strengths, and potential contribution.
• Comment on the overall novelty and alignment with the journal’s scope.

b) Major Comments

• Scientific rigor: Are the study design, methods, and analyses appropriate?
• Validity: Do the data support the conclusions?
• Originality: Does the work advance current knowledge in immunity and infectious diseases?
• Ethical compliance: Are approvals, consents, and guidelines followed?

c) Minor Comments

• Clarity of writing and organization.
• Appropriateness of figures, tables, and references.
• Formatting or language improvements, if needed.

d) Final Recommendation

Choose one of the following:

• Accept – Manuscript is suitable for publication with minimal or no revisions.
• Minor Revision – Manuscript requires small adjustments to meet standards.
• Major Revision – Substantial changes are needed before further consideration.
• Reject – Manuscript is unsuitable due to lack of originality, rigor, or relevance.

4. Timeliness of Reviews

• Reviewers are generally expected to return their evaluations within 2–3 weeks of invitation.
• If additional time is needed, please notify the editorial office promptly.
• Declining a review invitation should be done quickly so that an alternative reviewer can be appointed.

5. Handling Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must decline an invitation if they:
  • Have collaborated with the author(s) in the past three years.
  • Work at the same institution as the author(s).
  • Have financial or personal interests that could bias their judgment.
• If unsure, reviewers should disclose potential conflicts to the editor for guidance.

6. Qualities of a Good Review

A high-quality review should be:

• Constructive – Aimed at helping authors improve their work.
• Specific – Pointing out precise issues with evidence or examples.
• Balanced – Highlighting both strengths and weaknesses.
• Respectful – Encouraging scholarly growth while maintaining professionalism.

7. Communication with the Editorial Office

• All correspondence should be conducted through the journal’s submission system or via the editorial office email.
• Reviewers must not contact authors directly.
• Any concerns about the manuscript, reviewer role, or ethical issues should be communicated confidentially to the editorial team.

8. Recognition of Reviewers

JIID values the critical role of reviewers and acknowledges their contribution through:

• Reviewer Certificates for completed reviews.
• Eligibility for Editorial Board consideration based on consistent, high-quality reviews.
• Annual recognition of outstanding reviewers on the journal’s website.

9. Contact Information

For reviewer queries, support, or to request resources, please contact: editor.gjiid@sciconxjournals.com

✅ By following these instructions, reviewers contribute to the credibility, fairness, and impact of the SCICONX Journal of Immunity and Infectious Diseases, strengthening its mission to advance global health and scientific excellence.