ISSN: 2641-5013 | Publisher: Heighten Sciences Publication Incorporation | Framework: COPE • ICMJE • WAME • DOAJ

1. Purpose of Peer Review

The peer-review process is fundamental to maintaining the scientific quality and credibility of the International Journal of Clinical Virology (IJCV). Reviewers play a crucial role in evaluating manuscripts for accuracy, originality, and significance, ensuring that published work meets the highest standards of clinical and experimental virology research.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of assigned manuscripts.
Maintain strict confidentiality regarding all manuscript details.
Identify potential conflicts of interest and notify the Editor immediately.
Refrain from using unpublished information for personal research.
Provide feedback that improves the clarity, methodology, and scientific value of the paper.

3. Ethical Principles for Reviewers

Integrity: Assess manuscripts honestly without bias or external influence.
Confidentiality: Do not share manuscripts or discuss them with unauthorized persons.
Objectivity: Evaluate content based on scientific merit, not personal opinions or relationships.
Accountability: Reviewers are responsible for providing evidence-based evaluations that can be justified.

4. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest, including financial ties, institutional affiliations, or recent collaborations with the authors. If such a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the assignment to maintain transparency and fairness.

5. Confidentiality Obligations

All materials received for review are confidential and must not be shared, copied, or discussed outside the peer-review process. Reviewers must not contact the authors directly or use any information from unpublished manuscripts for personal advantage.

6. Review Process and Deadlines

Reviewers are typically expected to submit their evaluations within 14–21 days.
Extensions may be granted upon request, provided timely communication with the editorial office.
Delays without notice may result in reassignment of the review to maintain editorial timelines.

7. Structure of the Review Report

Reviewers should structure their reports as follows:

Summary: Provide a concise overview of the manuscript’s purpose and findings.
Major Comments: Address methodological flaws, data validity, or ethical issues.
Minor Comments: Suggest improvements in clarity, grammar, or formatting.
Recommendation: Choose between Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

8. Objectivity and Constructive Criticism

Critiques should focus on scientific content, not personal attributes or writing style. Reviewers must aim to help authors strengthen their work through actionable suggestions while avoiding discouraging or disrespectful language.

9. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

Reviewers are encouraged to alert editors to suspected plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical research practices. All concerns are handled confidentially and in accordance with COPE’s procedures for suspected misconduct.

10. Ethical Review of Clinical and Animal Research

Verify that studies involving humans adhere to the Declaration of Helsinki.
Ensure that animal studies follow institutional and national ethical standards.
Check for documented ethics committee approvals and informed consent statements where applicable.

11. Data and Statistical Evaluation

Reviewers should assess whether the presented data support the conclusions, and whether the statistical analyses are appropriate and transparent. They may suggest additional analyses or clarify data presentation to strengthen the manuscript.

12. Communication with Editors

All communication between reviewers and editors must remain professional and confidential. Reviewers should promptly inform editors of potential ethical issues, conflicts of interest, or the need for additional expertise.

13. Anonymity in Peer Review

IJCV follows a double-blind review model. Reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to authors, and authors’ identities are concealed from reviewers. Reviewers must take care not to reveal their identity through writing style, document metadata, or comments.

14. Acceptance and Decline of Invitations

Reviewers should accept only assignments within their area of expertise.
Decline promptly if unable to complete the review due to time constraints or conflicts of interest.
Provide suggestions for alternative qualified reviewers when declining an invitation.

15. Recognition and Reviewer Rewards

IJCV recognizes reviewers’ contributions through acknowledgment in annual reports, certificates of appreciation, and optional public recognition (with consent). Reviewers who consistently demonstrate excellence may be invited to join the editorial board.

16. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts to third-party AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly) that store or reuse data. Automated tools can only be used offline for grammar or readability checks, never for content evaluation.

17. Post-Review Conduct

Once the review is submitted, reviewers should not discuss the manuscript publicly or privately. If new information becomes available after submission, they should contact the editor to provide clarification or addenda.

18. Misconduct in Peer Review

Unethical reviewer behavior—such as delaying reviews for competitive advantage, copying text, or disclosing confidential data—will result in removal from the reviewer database and possible reporting to relevant institutions.

19. Continuous Professional Development

IJCV encourages reviewers to engage in ongoing training on research ethics, statistical interpretation, and peer-review standards. COPE and Publons Academy offer free resources to enhance reviewer competency.

20. References and Resources

21. Contact

For Peer Review Queries
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://www.clinvirologyjournal.com/

View Peer Review Process

Reviewer Guidelines