Role of the Reviewer

Reviewers assess scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to marrow biology. Your insights help authors strengthen their work and help readers trust published evidence.

What to Evaluate

• Originality, significance, and fit with JBMB scope.
• Study design, methodology, and statistical reporting.
• Data integrity, figure clarity, and reproducibility.
• Ethics approvals, consent statements, and trial registration when relevant.
• Clarity of writing and completeness of references.

Constructive Feedback

Provide clear, actionable comments that help authors revise efficiently. Separate major concerns from minor edits and reference specific sections or figures.

• Explain why an issue affects validity or interpretation.
• Suggest practical improvements or additional analyses.
• Maintain a respectful tone focused on the science.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

• Do not share manuscripts or reviewer comments outside the review process.
• Decline reviews if you have conflicts due to recent collaboration or competing interests.
• Report suspected conflicts to the editorial office.

Timelines and Responsiveness

Timely reviews keep authors informed and support efficient publication. If you cannot complete a review, decline promptly so another reviewer can be assigned.

Review Structure

Clear structure helps authors address feedback efficiently and helps editors interpret your recommendations. A well organized review separates essential scientific issues from minor edits.

• Brief summary of the manuscript and its contribution.
• Major issues affecting validity, interpretation, or ethics.
• Minor issues such as clarity, formatting, or references.
• Confidential comments to the editor when appropriate.

Recommendation Categories

Your recommendation should align with the evidence you present in the review. Editors weigh reviewer input, but clear rationale supports consistent decision making.

• Accept or minor revision when the study is sound and complete.
• Major revision when substantial clarification or analysis is needed.
• Reject when scope fit or scientific rigor is insufficient.

Reporting and Data Checks

• Confirm data availability statements are present and clear.
• Verify statistical methods and sample size reporting.
• Note missing ethics approvals or trial registration details.

Ethics and Integrity Checks

• Flag potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data fabrication.
• Assess whether images appear manipulated or inconsistent.
• Confirm that sensitive patient data is properly anonymized.

Need Assistance?

For questions about review scope or ethics concerns, contact [email protected].