Guide for Reviewers
Accessing the Manuscript
1. Log in with your ID and password.
2. Open the Reviewer Panel under your account.
3. Select the manuscript under New Review Invitations.
4. Accept or decline the invitation.
5. Once accepted, all manuscript files will appear under Documents.
6. After evaluation, complete the Reviewer Form, upload any comments, and click Submit Review.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
Evaluate the manuscript fairly, without bias, and within their area of expertise.
Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
Provide transparent, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
Report any concerns related to ethical issues, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data integrity.
Avoid any conflicts of interest and notify the editor if such a situation arises.
Reviewers must also adhere to the guidelines outlined in the journal’s Ethical Principles and Publication Policy, including responsible and limited use of AI tools.
Review Timeline
Review invitation response: within 7 days.
Standard review period: 30 days after accepting the assignment.
If needed, a short extension may be requested from the editor.
Should a reviewer fail to respond, the system automatically marks the invitation as declined.
Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess elements such as:
Scientific originality and relevance,
Study design, methodology, and ethical compliance,
Accuracy and clarity of results,
Validity of conclusions,
Adequacy of references, figures, and tables,
Overall organization and readability.
Reviewers may recommend:
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Accept
Reject
Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct
Manuscripts must be treated as confidential material.
Unpublished data must not be used for personal research.
Reviewers should not attempt to identify authors during the double-anonymized process.
Any suspected ethical misconduct should be reported directly to the editor.
Reviewer Decisions
If reviews conflict, the editor may seek a third opinion.
Acceptance requires at least two positive reviews.
A single strong negative review may be sufficient for rejection.
Reviewers who issue a major revision may be asked to reassess the revised manuscript.
This concise guide ensures that reviewers understand their responsibilities and the steps necessary to carry out a professional and ethical evaluation in accordance with CJM’s Ethical Principles and Publication Policy.
INDEXING & ABSTRACTING & ARCHIVING
Cerasus Journal of Medicine, hosted by Dergipark, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.