Thank you for agreeing to serve as a peer reviewer for this journal. Your expertise and critical assessment are vital to maintaining the high quality and integrity of the science we publish. The following resources are designed to guide you through our review process, clarify editorial expectations, and help you write constructive, efficient, and fair reviews.
For Technical System Support: Consult the editorial office (in “Contact us”) or Silverchair support team (S1help@silverchair.com or s1help.chinese@silverchair.com).
For Editorial or Policy Questions: Contact the editorial office (in “Contact us”).
We are committed to supporting our reviewers. Thank you for your dedication to advancing medical science through rigorous peer review.
To support reviewers in conducting efficient and high-quality peer review, the journal provides the following training materials and system guidance resources:
● Reviewer FAQs
Comprehensive answers to common questions regarding the peer review process, including reviewer responsibilities, timelines, and best practices.
Access here: https://support.silverchair.com/s/topic/0TOPC00000022Qj4AI/reviewer
● ScholarOne Manuscripts Reviewer Guide
A detailed, step-by-step guide to using the ScholarOne Manuscripts system, covering:
Access here: https://support.silverchair.com/s/scholarone-manuscripts/reviewers
● Video Tutorial (Chinese Version)
A visual walkthrough of the ScholarOne Manuscripts review workflow, designed to assist reviewers in navigating the system more efficiently.
Watch here: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1PJ8FzvEyS/
Our journal relies on peer review to:
Confidentiality: The manuscript is confidential. Do not share, discuss, or use its content until it is publicly published.
Artificial intelligence (AI) Use: Reviewers are NOT permitted to upload manuscripts, review reports, or any confidential review-related materials to generative AI or AI-assistant tools. Generative AI tools must NOT be used to assist with the scientific evaluation, judgment, or drafting of the review report.
Conflict of Interest: Decline the review invitation if you have a competing interest (e.g., close collaboration with authors, direct competition, financial stake). Notify the editor immediately if a conflict becomes apparent during review.
Timeliness: Please respond to invitations and submit reviews within the agreed deadline. If you need an extension, inform the editorial office (in “Contact us”) at any time.
Constructive Tone: Critiques should be professional, respectful, and aimed at improving the science, not at criticizing the author.
1. Invitation: You will receive an email invitation from our manuscript system. The email will include Accept and Decline links; you may click either link to accept or decline the invitation directly without logging into the submission system.
2. Accept / Decline: Please click the link in the email to accept or decline the review invitation. If the link has expired, you may access the manuscript system by clicking “For Author – Online Submission” in journal website, log in to the platform, and locate the corresponding review invitation in the Reviewer Center.
3. Access Manuscript: Once you accept the invitation, you may review the manuscript directly in the Reviewer Center of the manuscript system. The interface will display the manuscript content and the authors’ responses to previous reviewer comments for revised manuscript. You may also download the manuscript and any supplementary files from the Reviewer Center. If you prefer, you can upload a document containing your review comments to the system.
4. Submit Review: Once your review comments are complete, please evaluate the overall quality of the manuscript and submit your review through the system. Thank you very much for your valuable support.
We recommend organizing your report into three main sections:
a. Summary of the Work: Briefly summarize the study in your own words. State the main claims and significance of the research.
b. Major Comments: Address fundamental issues that affect the paper's soundness or clarity. These typically relate to:
● Research Question & Originality: Importance and novelty of the study.
● Study Design & Methodology: Appropriateness of methods, patient cohort/animal model, controls, blinding, etc.
● Statistical Analysis: Correctness of tests, power, data presentation.
● Results & Interpretation: Whether data support the conclusions, alternative explanations.
● Ethics: Approval for human/animal studies, informed consent, compliance with relevant guidelines (e.g., Helsinki Declaration, ARRIVE).
For the point mentioned in review, please clearly describe the issue and provide a specific suggestion for improvement.
c. Minor Comments: List specific, smaller corrections (e.g., typographical errors, unclear phrases, figure labeling, citation inaccuracies).
d. Comments to the Editor: This section in the online form is not shared with the authors. Use it to:
● Disclose any potential conflict of interest.
● Comment on the priority/novelty for the field.
● Raise suspicions of ethical misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation).
COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics): https://publicationethics.org/
AMA Manual of Style: A key resource for medical writing and formatting.