When you receive an invitation
- ✓ Accept only if the manuscript falls within your expertise and you can complete the review within four weeks.
- ✓ Decline if you have a conflict of interest, for example if you think you know the authors, work at the same institution, or have collaborated with them recently.
- ✓ Reply to the invitation promptly, and suggest an alternative reviewer if you decline.
Writing your review
Please consider:
- Does the manuscript make a clear and original contribution to the field?
- Is the research question clear and well grounded in the literature?
- Are the methods appropriate, transparent and well executed?
- Do the evidence and analysis support the findings and conclusions?
- Does the manuscript address relevant ethical issues, including the protection of participants?
- Is the manuscript clearly written and well organised, with accurate references?
- What are the implications for theory, policy or practice?
Structure your report with a short summary of the manuscript, your main comments, and any minor points. Number your comments so that authors can respond to each. Write in a respectful, constructive tone, and give reasons for your judgements. Put any confidential remarks for the editor in the separate box for editors only.
Recommendation
Choose one: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, reject and invite resubmission, or reject. The editor takes the final decision and may not follow every recommendation.
Confidentiality and AI tools
Treat the manuscript as a confidential document. Do not share it, discuss it with others, use its content in your own work, or upload any part of it, or of your report, to a generative AI tool.
Recognition
AJRMG thanks its reviewers in an annual list on the website and, on request, provides a certificate of review. Reviewers may also record their reviews on their ORCID record where the journal enables this.