This section contains links to information and functions required by designated reviewers of the Journal of Informed Pharmacotherapy.
Please select from the list below:
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Filter out flawed work and prevent its publication
Assist the Editors and the author(s) to improve the quality & importance of the work:
- evaluate originality, quality, and importance of the paper
- identify errors, misinterpretation, over interpretation, and “crimes of passion” committed by authors
- fill in missing information, or at least identify its omission
- support your comments with appropriate references if necessary
- in addition to identifying faults, positive comments are appreciated as well.
- DO NOT provide line-by-line comments on grammar and spelling. Global comments like “many spelling/grammar” errors is all that is needed. This is not the most efficient use of your time.
ALWAYS inform us of potential conflicts of interest.
In your review, point out areas which you are not qualified to comment on (lack of comment implies correctness, which may not be appropriate).
Inform us if you have previously reviewed this paper for another journal. This way we can determine whether it has been significantly revised prior to submission to JIP.
Respect that the manuscript is a privileged communication, is confidential, and for your eyes only. We do, however, encourage you to consult your colleagues who may have useful input to provide.
Be PROMPT in the completion of your review.
- Inform us immediately if you cannot complete the review by the deadline.
- Your referral of the manuscript to another qualified reviewer is appreciated if you are unable to review it by the deadline.
Online Review Form for JIP Reviewers
Please complete all appropriate sections of the form and press the SUBMIT REVIEW button at the bottom when complete.
Feel free to compose your review in the word processor of your choice, then simply cut and paste the text into the appropriate section of this form.
NOTE: Suggested questions to be answered are provided. Copy them into your word processor, then paste them with your responses back into this box.
- Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
- Is the abstract is specific, representative of the article and in an appropriate structured format?
- Has the purpose of the article has been made clear in the introduction section of the paper?
- Would you consider the general objective of the study to be important for the field of interest?
- Have the experimental methods are described adequately?
- Are there any limitations in the database(s) used?
- Is the study design and the methods were generally appropriate for the purposes of the study?
- Are the procedures been presented in sufficient detail to enable a reader to duplicate them?
- Are there any specific errors of fact or interpretation other than those described above?
- Are the statistical methods (descriptive and inferential statistics) appropriate?
- Is the discussion is relevant and the author has correctly identified most of the limitations to this study?
- Have any particular ideas have been over or under emphasized?
- Has the author has cited pertinent literature?
- Is the referencing format appropriate for the journal?
- Is the manuscript relatively concise?
- Can you recommend any changes to truncate the paper without affecting its quality?
- Has the material in the manuscript been published previously?