Reviewer Guidelines

Introduction

The peer review process at the International Journal of Clinical Anesthesia and Research (IJCAR) ensures academic integrity, accuracy, and scientific rigor. Reviewers are essential contributors who assist editors in evaluating manuscripts objectively and ethically.

“Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publishing — grounded in fairness, confidentiality, and responsibility.”

Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review helps ensure that only high-quality, original, and scientifically valid studies are published. Reviewers play a critical role in improving manuscripts through constructive feedback, ensuring clarity, relevance, and contribution to anesthesiology and clinical research.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Evaluate the manuscript impartially and confidentially.
  • Provide timely, clear, and constructive feedback to authors.
  • Identify any potential ethical issues such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, or data manipulation.
  • Notify the editor immediately if they feel unqualified to review the manuscript.
  • Avoid personal criticism and focus on scientific content.

Confidentiality

  • Manuscripts and related data must be treated as confidential documents.
  • Content must not be discussed or shared without editorial authorization.
  • Reviewers must not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

Conflict of Interest (COI)

  • Reviewers must declare any potential COI before accepting a review assignment.
  • Conflicts may include financial ties, personal relationships, or academic competition.
  • Reviewers with a COI should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

Ethical Review Standards

Ethical Area Reviewer Responsibility Action
Plagiarism Check for unoriginal content or improper citation. Report to editor immediately.
Data Fabrication Identify unrealistic data or figures. Request clarification from authors through editor.
Duplicate Submission Check if similar work exists elsewhere. Inform editor confidentially.
Patient Data Ensure consent and ethical approval statements are present. Highlight missing information to editor.

Timeliness and Communication

  • Reviews should be completed within the specified deadline (usually 2–3 weeks).
  • Delays must be communicated promptly to the editorial office.
  • Failure to deliver reviews on time may affect future invitations.

Structure of a Good Review

  1. Summary: Briefly describe the purpose and significance of the study.
  2. Major Comments: Identify key strengths, weaknesses, and methodological issues.
  3. Minor Comments: Suggest improvements in clarity, formatting, or references.
  4. Recommendation: Choose one of: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

Ethical Conduct during Review

  • Remain objective and professional in all comments.
  • Do not attempt to influence editorial decisions for personal benefit.
  • Refrain from suggesting citation of your own work unless directly relevant.

Recognition and Credit

IJCAR acknowledges reviewers’ efforts through annual certificates and public recognition (with consent). Reviewers may also register their reviews on Publons or ORCID.

Reminder: Every reviewer represents the integrity of the journal. Objective, ethical, and timely reviews strengthen the trust in published research.

Contact Information

For reviewer assistance or technical issues:
Email: [email protected]
Alternate: [email protected]
Website: www.anesthesiaresjournal.com

Source: Based on COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, ICMJE Recommendations, and anesthesiaresjournal.com reviewer resources.