The SCICONX Journal of Vaccine and Immunology (JVI) recognizes peer reviewers as essential contributors to the quality, credibility, and integrity of the scholarly publishing process. Reviewers support the journal by providing independent, expert, and constructive assessments of submitted manuscripts, helping authors strengthen their work and assisting editors in making informed editorial decisions.

Reviewing for this journal is a professional responsibility that requires objectivity, confidentiality, and adherence to high ethical standards.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers invited to assess manuscripts for JVI are expected to:

• Provide fair, unbiased, and timely evaluations based on scientific merit
• Assess originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope
• Offer constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work
• Maintain confidentiality of the manuscript and review process
• Declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting a review

If a reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or cannot complete the review within the requested timeframe, they should promptly inform the editorial office.

Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not:

• Share manuscript content with third parties
• Use unpublished data or ideas for personal advantage
• Contact authors directly regarding the manuscript

Any suspected ethical issues, including plagiarism, data manipulation, or ethical concerns involving human or animal research, should be confidentially reported to the handling Editor.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Conflicts may arise from personal, professional, financial, or collaborative relationships with the authors or affiliated institutions. If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline the review invitation.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects when evaluating a manuscript:

Scientific Quality and Originality

• Does the manuscript present novel and meaningful findings?
• Is the research question clearly defined and justified?

Methodology and Study Design

• Are the methods appropriate, clearly described, and reproducible?
• Are ethical approvals and study registrations adequately reported?

Data Analysis and Interpretation

• Are the results presented clearly and logically?
• Are conclusions supported by the data?
• Are limitations acknowledged appropriately?

Presentation and Clarity

• Is the manuscript well-structured and written in clear language?
• Are tables and figures appropriate, accurate, and informative?

Relevance and Impact

• Does the study contribute to the advancement of vaccine science or immunology?
• Is the work relevant to researchers, clinicians, or public health professionals?

Reviewer Reports

Reviewers should submit their evaluations through the journal’s review system or designated communication channel. Reports should include:

• Specific comments for the authors
• Clear recommendations for improvement
• Confidential comments to the Editor, if necessary

Comments should be professional, respectful, and focused on the content rather than the authors.

Recommendation Categories

Reviewers may be asked to recommend one of the following outcomes:

• Accept as submitted
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

Final publication decisions are made by the Editors based on reviewer input and editorial judgment.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Reviewers may use AI-assisted tools for language support or reference checking; however:

• AI tools must not compromise manuscript confidentiality
• Substantive intellectual assessment must be conducted by the reviewer
• AI tools must not be used to generate reviewer reports without human oversight

Timeliness and Professional Courtesy

Timely reviews are critical to maintaining an efficient publication process. Reviewers are expected to submit their reports within the agreed timeframe or notify the editorial office if delays arise.

Recognition of Reviewers

The SCICONX Journal of Vaccine and Immunology values the contributions of its reviewers. The journal may acknowledge reviewers through annual recognition lists, certificates of contribution, or other non-monetary means, while maintaining reviewer confidentiality.

Commitment to Quality and Integrity

By agreeing to review for the SCICONX Journal of Vaccine and Immunology, reviewers affirm their commitment to ethical conduct, academic rigor, and constructive scholarly engagement. Their expertise plays a vital role in advancing vaccine and immunology research for the benefit of the global scientific community.