Journal of Advanced Cytology - Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewers ensure cytology research is accurate, ethical, and clinically meaningful.
Review Structure
- Brief summary of the contribution
- Major concerns affecting validity
- Minor comments for clarity
- Recommendation with rationale
Evaluation Focus
- Study design appropriateness and bias control
- Statistical reporting and outcome transparency
- Imaging protocol clarity and validation
- Ethics approval and participant protections
Timelines
Reviewers should accept or decline invitations promptly and deliver reviews within the agreed timeframe.
Confidentiality and Conflicts
Manuscripts are confidential. Reviewers should disclose conflicts and decline assignments when necessary.
Constructive Feedback
Provide specific, actionable feedback and cite sections where changes are needed.
Statistical Review
Comment on sample size justification, effect sizes, and handling of missing data.
Tone and Respect
Reviews should be professional and focused on improving the manuscript rather than personal criticism.
Comments to Authors and Editors
Provide constructive comments for authors and use confidential notes to editors for ethical or methodological concerns.
Data Availability Review
Verify that data availability statements include repository links or access conditions and are consistent with methods.
Safety Reporting
Check that adverse events and safety monitoring are reported clearly, especially for clinical interventions.
Recommendation Rationale
Provide a clear recommendation and summarize the primary reasons supporting your decision.
Review Efficiency
Structured reviews with numbered comments help authors respond efficiently and support timely decisions.
Review Checklist
Use a structured approach to evaluate methods, data integrity, and diagnostic relevance.
Clear and focused feedback strengthens the final publication and supports clinical adoption.
- Check alignment between objectives and outcomes
- Assess imaging methodology and validation
- Review ethics and consent documentation
- Confirm data availability statements
Final Recommendation
Summarize the most critical issues and indicate whether revisions can address them.
Concise recommendations help editors issue clear decisions.
Balanced recommendations improve transparency for authors and reviewers.
Clear recommendations also improve review consistency.
Focused feedback strengthens the final publication quality.
Review clarity improves author revisions and editorial decisions.
Clear reviews support fair and timely outcomes.
Consistency improves review reliability.
Reliability strengthens editorial confidence in reviews.
Respectful tone improves author response quality.
Respect improves collaboration with authors.
Collaboration improves revision quality.
Quality revisions improve outcomes.
Outcomes improve knowledge.
Join Our Reviewer Community
Register as a reviewer and contribute to cytology research quality.
