Thank you for agreeing to review for the European Journal of Musculoskeletal Diseases (EJMD).
The journal relies on the expertise and professionalism of independent reviewers to maintain scientific quality, integrity, and ethical standards throughout the peer-review process.
All manuscripts should be treated as confidential documents.
Peer Review Process
The journal operates a double-blind peer-review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.
Manuscripts considered suitable for the journal after initial editorial assessment are typically evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject area.
Reviewers are asked to provide constructive, objective, and timely evaluations to assist the Editors in reaching an editorial decision.
Possible recommendations include:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor based on reviewer evaluations and editorial judgment.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts according to the following criteria:
- scientific quality and originality;
- methodological rigor;
- clinical and academic relevance;
- ethical standards;
- clarity and organization of the manuscript;
- adequacy of references and supporting literature;
- validity of conclusions based on the presented data.
Review comments should be professional, constructive, and sufficiently detailed to help authors improve their work.
Criticism should focus on the scientific content of the manuscript and not on the authors personally.
Comments intended only for the Editors may be submitted separately as confidential remarks.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and should not be shared, discussed, or distributed without authorization from the Editorial Office.
Information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage or to disadvantage others.
If reviewers wish to consult a colleague regarding a manuscript, prior approval from the Editor should be obtained.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where a conflict of interest may affect objective evaluation.
Conflicts of interest may include:
- recent collaboration with the authors;
- institutional affiliation with the authors;
- direct scientific competition;
- financial or personal relationships relevant to the manuscript.
Any potential conflict should be disclosed to the Editor before accepting the review assignment.
Timeliness
Reviewers are asked to submit their reports within the timeframe indicated by the Editorial Office.
If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the requested period, the Editorial Office should be informed promptly.
Ethical Concerns
Reviewers should notify the Editor if they identify:
- possible plagiarism;
- duplicate publication;
- image or data manipulation;
- unethical research practices;
- major ethical concerns involving human or animal studies.
Any concerns raised during peer review will be handled confidentially by the editorial team according to the journal’s ethical policies.
Editorial Independence
Editors and Editorial Board members submitting manuscripts to the journal are excluded from editorial handling and decision-making related to their own submissions.
Independent editorial oversight is maintained throughout the review process.
Reviewer Acknowledgement
The European Journal of Musculoskeletal Diseases appreciates the valuable contribution of reviewers in maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of the journal.