Instructions for Reviewers

The Journal of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Research (JCVTR) operates a double-blind peer-review process in which the names of authors and reviewers are hidden from each other. Our peer-review policy adheres to the guidelines provided by COPE and ICMJE.

All submitted papers are thoroughly assessed to ensure that they are aligned with the aims and scope of the journal and are written in accordance with guidelines for authors. Once the eligible manuscripts are chosen, well-qualified peer-reviewers will be selected and invited via email based on their expertise and familiarity with the topic of the paper. Reviewers will be asked to accept or decline the request for review in a reasonable period. In the case of acceptance, reviewers will be directed to our online review system in which they can read the manuscript and provide their comments for authors and editors.

For providing authors with timely decisions regarding the submitted paper, we expect reviewers to submit their review within 14 days. Please accept the review request if the topic of the paper is within your area of expertise and if you can complete the review in the expected timeframe, and if you have no competing or conflicts of interest that may bias the objective review process. Please note that all submitted manuscripts and files are confidential documents, and reviewers must ensure that the confidentiality of the review process is maintained. Reviewers are not allowed to disclose any information obtained during the review process with anybody or involve anybody else in the review process without official permission from JCVTR.

In writing your review, please provide objective feedback constructively. Giving specific comments and suggestions rather than general statements is encouraged.

The following points are some of the issues that must be considered in reviewing an article:

- The originality and novelty of work, clear explanation of the problem, and the purpose of the study.

- An adequate review of the literature with appropriate citations

- Suitable design of the study for the defined purpose

- Detailed explanations of methods and materials of research

- Proper use of statistical analysis

- A complete representation of results

- Clear explanations for figures and tables

- Comprehensive interpretation and discussion of new findings in the context of previous knowledge

- Accurate conclusions supported by the findings of the research

- Clarification on the limitations of the study

- Concerns regarding the conflicts of interest and compliance with ethical standards for conducting research

For more guidance, please refer to:

  1. COPE Council. COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Version 2 September 2017 https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/responsibilities-in-the-submission-and-peer-peview-process.html, Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, 08/22/2020 Available from: http://www.ICMJE.org.