Reviewer Guidelines

Peer reviewers are essential to maintaining the quality and integrity of the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (IJCEO). This document provides detailed guidance for reviewers on how to conduct ethical, thorough, and constructive evaluations of submitted manuscripts.

Role of Reviewers

  • Provide objective, unbiased, and timely assessments of manuscripts.
  • Support editors in making fair and evidence-based publication decisions.
  • Help authors improve the clarity, rigor, and impact of their research.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and significance of the research.
  • Clarity and validity of the research question.
  • Appropriateness of methodology and statistical analysis.
  • Integrity and reproducibility of data.
  • Quality of discussion and conclusions.
  • Ethical compliance in human and animal research.
  • Relevance to the scope of IJCEO.

Reviewer Responsibilities

  1. Maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscript content.
  2. Disclose conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment.
  3. Decline review requests outside of their expertise or if unable to meet deadlines.
  4. Provide constructive, respectful, and evidence-based feedback.
  5. Avoid personal criticism of authors.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers should not discuss manuscripts with colleagues, use unpublished information for personal gain, or share content without editor approval.

Conflicts of Interest

  • Reviewers must disclose financial, professional, or personal relationships that may bias their judgment.
  • Conflicted reviewers should decline assignments promptly.

Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should alert editors to suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices. Concerns must be documented and communicated privately to the editorial team.

Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to complete reviews within the agreed timeline, usually 2–3 weeks. Extensions should be requested in advance if more time is needed.

How to Prepare a Review

  1. Read the manuscript carefully, taking notes on strengths and weaknesses.
  2. Assess the study design, methodology, and statistical analysis.
  3. Evaluate clarity of writing, organization, and referencing.
  4. Provide specific suggestions for improvement.
  5. Summarize your overall recommendation: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.

Ethical Use of AI in Reviewing

Reviewers should not rely solely on generative AI tools to assess manuscripts. While AI may assist in language refinement, reviewers remain fully responsible for the integrity and accuracy of their evaluations.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I discuss the manuscript with colleagues?

No. Manuscripts under review are confidential and must not be shared without editor permission.

How should I handle suspected plagiarism?

Notify the editor with evidence. Do not contact the authors directly.

What if I cannot complete a review on time?

Inform the editorial office immediately so that another reviewer can be assigned if necessary.