Journal of Advanced Cytology - Reviewer Resources

Reviewers receive guidance to ensure consistent and fair evaluation.

• Reporting guideline references by study design
• Structured review templates and checklists
• Ethics guidance for consent and data integrity
• Data availability review tips

• Clear research question and appropriate study design
• Alignment between objectives and outcomes
• Complete ethics approvals and consent statements
• Transparent statistical reporting

Reviewers can request statistical support or imaging validation checks for complex submissions.

Use provided templates to document major concerns and minor edits clearly.

If any ethics or consent issues arise during review, alert the editorial office with specific details.

• Confirm sample size justification and power details
• Review effect sizes and confidence intervals
• Check missing data handling and sensitivity analyses
• Assess alignment between outcomes and conclusions

Check that imaging parameters, staining protocols, and magnification details are clearly described.

Use provided templates to document major concerns, minor edits, and recommendation rationale.

Clear structure improves decision speed and author revision quality.

Reviewers can request guidance from the editorial office for complex imaging or molecular analyses.

Consistent review structure improves communication with authors and accelerates decisions.

Structured checklists and templates help reviewers focus on methodological quality and diagnostic relevance.

Clear documentation supports transparent editorial decisions and improves author revision quality.

• Use the statistical checklist for quantitative studies
• Verify imaging metadata and staining details
• Confirm ethics approvals and consent statements
• Check data availability links and access notes

The editorial office can provide additional guidance for complex study designs or specialized assays.

Reviewers are encouraged to request clarification when needed.

Clear communication with editors supports efficient resolution of review questions.

Support helps maintain consistent review quality across submissions.

Consistent guidance improves reviewer confidence and decision quality.

Clear tools help reviewers focus on diagnostic relevance.

Standardized guidance supports efficient review workflows.

Clear tools reduce review delays.

Reduced delays support timely publication goals.

Checklists reduce oversight gaps during review.

Clear checklists support consistent review quality.

Consistent quality supports editorial confidence.

Confidence supports timely decisions.

Timely decisions support authors.