Best Practices for Peer Review #

Engaging in peer review, whether open or traditional, is a critical responsibility for researchers. To ensure that peer reviews are constructive, ethical, and aligned with Open Science principles, ICArEHB researchers should follow these best practices:

Provide Constructive Feedback:

• Reviews should be detailed, respectful, and aimed at improving the manuscript. Criticisms should be constructive and include actionable suggestions for improvement.
• Focus on the content, methodology, and interpretation of the research, ensuring that the study is scientifically sound and conclusions are supported by the data.

Maintain Objectivity:

• Reviews should be unbiased and based solely on the merits of the research, regardless of the author’s reputation, institution, or previous work. Avoid personal or ad hominem attacks.

Disclose Conflicts of Interest:

• If you have any conflict of interest that could bias your review (e.g., competing research, personal relationships with the authors), you must disclose this to the editor or decline to review the manuscript.

Be Transparent and Ethical:

• When participating in open peer review, transparency is key. Provide clear, well-reasoned comments that can be publicly shared if requested.
• Reviewers should never misuse privileged information gained through peer review (e.g., sharing data or ideas from the manuscript under review).

Adhere to Timelines:

• Peer reviews should be completed within the timeframe provided by the journal. If delays are unavoidable, notify the editor as soon as possible.

Respect Confidentiality:

• If reviewing for a journal that follows a blinded or traditional peer review process, the content of the manuscript and the review should remain confidential until publication.