How To Become Reviewer
Annals of Medical Research (Ann Med Res) Reviewer
We need a constant supply of new peer reviewers. If you would like to volunteer, please register at our electronic submission system by entering to https://www.ejmanager.com/reviewers/index.php?isl=login This process will automatically add your name, contact details. Do let us know once you have registered with an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org. Before registering, all interested reviewers must meet the following requirements and should acknowledge the following responsibilities.
Requirements for Reviewers
All interested reviewers must meet the requirements depicted below for Annals of Medical Research.
The interested reviewer must both have a valid degree in Medicine and a Specialty diploma, or a Ph.D. in research related areas such as Biostatistics, medicine.
The interested reviewer must be academically affiliated with a university, hospital, institution or must be an educator in a research hospital with residency training.
The interested reviewer must have at least 1 original research publication listed on his or her CV. All articles pending a final decision must be included.
The reviewer is expected to review 1 to 4 at least reviews per calendar year.
The reviewer is invited to review a manuscript by an invitation e-mail which includes the proposed review duration (2 or 3 weeks) and their log-in information for the electronic submission system.
Reviewer has to log-in to the electronic submission system in 5 days after he or she received the e-mail and must inform the editorial board if they will review the manuscript or not by selecting one of the two options in the system (“I Accept” or “I Decline”). Reviewer duties are no longer valid after 5 days since we assume that you are unavailable to respond to this request.
The reviewer must complete the assigned review within the proposed review duration provided in the invitation e-mail (2 or 3 weeks according to the type of manuscript).
There are occasions where a reviewer may be unable to complete his/her review within the allotted time due to unforeseen circumstances. In this case, please contact the editor immediately so that arrangements can be made for the review to be completed in a timely fashion.
We are sure that you are aware of the excellent initiative taken by Publons, which aims to speed up research by harnessing the power of peer review. They provide a platform that allows researchers to track, verify and be recognised for their peer review and editorial work. A researcher's peer review and editorial contributions can be displayed on their public Publons profile to show the world the impact they have on their research field and enhance their career. Publons rewards you for documenting your review history by providing you with a verified record which you can use in funding and promotion campaigns. It is very easy and will take hardly 3-5 minutes time. Kindly please follow the below mentioned steps
- Create your account here: https://publons.com/account/signup
- Forward your review receipts (i.e. "thank you for reviewing" emails from journals like our last mail) to email@example.com
Peer Reviewer Policy
The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Review Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.
Type of Peer Review
Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
How the referee is selected
Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated.
Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work.
Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.
How long does the review process take?
The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee's reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript.
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.
Editor's Decision is final
Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.