Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, consider the following questions:
- Does the article match your area of expertise? Only accept if you feel you can provide a high-quality review.
- Do you have a potential conflict of interest? Disclose this to the editor when you respond.
- Do you have time? Reviewing can be a lot of work – before you commit, make sure you can meet the deadline.
Respond to the invitation as soon as you can (even if it is to decline) – a delay in your decision slows down the review process and means more waiting for the author. Thank you for your cooperation. If you need extra time to complete a review, please contact prodekan.nauka@gf.ukim.edu.mk
Important notes
In reviewing, please pay attention to the following elements:
1) It is important to consider and conclude if the paper makes a valuable contribution to existing knowledge and literature in terms of theory development, new data, new methodology etc.
(2) Is the paper written and submitted according to Journals Instructions for the authors.
(3) Is the paper written and presented up to publishable standards of the Journal in terms of: whether any concepts have been defined adequately, whether the paper is well structured with coherent argumentation and well-integrated, clarity of any statistical data, tables and diagrams, whether the title reflects the contents of the paper accurately, if any part of the paper should be cut out, restructured or further developed.
(4) Appropriateness of referencing in terms of giving adequate credit to other contributors in the field, major omissions and whether the references are complete and written correctly.
(5) Reviewers’ proposal to the course of action may be to: accept the paper as presented, repeat the review process after changes recommended by reviewer, reject the paper.
Classification Guidelines
The following types of manuscripts are published in International Journal of Case Reports and Images:
- Original scientific manuscripts
- Preliminary manuscripts
- Review articles
- Professional papers
Original scientific manuscripts
An original scientific paper presents the results of original research that were not previously published in either full or preliminary form.
Preliminary manuscripts
A preliminary paper contains at least one new scientific fact or result that requires immediate publication, but it should not contain enough details to test the described results, as is the case with original scientific articles.
Review articles
A review article contains an overall review of recent and current research in a specific area. Papers in this category are surveys in nature that should contain critical references and evaluations. The references must be complete enough to permit a good insight into the subject matter.
Professional papers
A professional paper does not have to be based on original research, but it should contribute to the application of well-known research results and present theoretical conceptions.
Peer review expectations
Reviewers are expected to provide an objective critical assessment of the manuscript about the concept of the study, relevance in relation to current scientific knowledge, scientific content, language and grammar. Reviewers will be asked to make a recommendation for publishing the manuscript. Please provide reasons for the recommendations.
If the manuscript needs changes for improvement before it is accepted for publication, please make the suggestions on how to improve it. If the comments are negative please help the authors in improving their manuscript by explaining weaknesses in scientific content or language. We do not tolerate any offensive language in the comments. We may edit the reviewer’s comments for any errors in facts or language or to remove confidential information.
Confidentiality
The review process is a confidential communication between the Reviewers, Editors, Editorial Staff and the Corresponding author. Please do not discuss any manuscript received for review, with anyone not directly involved in the review process.
Privileges for peer reviewers
We realize that reviewing the manuscripts poses an extra burden on the reviewer’s precious time. As an appreciation for the valuable services and taking out time to review the manuscripts and as a further token of encouragements to the reviewers, we will acknowledge the reviewer’s contribution in the annual statement.