ACCSMI Annals of Clinical Case Studies and Medical Images

Role and Responsibilities

  • Provide an expert, impartial, and constructive evaluation of the manuscript.
  • Assess the scientific quality, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
  • Help authors improve their work through detailed, actionable comments.
  • Support the editor in making an informed publication decision.

Confidentiality

  • Treat all manuscript materials as strictly confidential.
  • Do not share, discuss, or use the manuscript’s data or ideas for personal research.

Ethical Considerations

  • Ensure that research involving humans or animals has appropriate ethical approval.
  • Identify issues related to plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data manipulation.
  • Report any concerns about misconduct confidentially to the editor.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should consider:

  • Originality and significance of the study.
  • Scientific rigor, methodology, and accuracy.
  • Quality and interpretation of data, figures, and tables.
  • Clarity, organization, and coherence of the manuscript.
  • Adequacy of the literature review and references.
  • Appropriateness of conclusions based on data.
  • Compliance with journal guidelines.

Review Structure

A helpful review generally includes:
  • Summary: Briefly describe the manuscript’s purpose and main findings.
  • Major Comments: Significant issues that affect validity, clarity, or scientific value.
  • Minor Comments: Small corrections, language issues, formatting, or clarifications.
  • Confidential Notes to Editor: Optional comments about suitability, concerns, or recommendations.

Timeliness

  • Accept a review invitation only if you can complete it on time.
  • Notify the editor immediately if delays occur.
  • Suggest alternative reviewers when appropriate.

Professional Conduct

  • Maintain an objective, respectful, and constructive tone.
  • Provide clear evidence and justification for recommendations.
  • Avoid overly brief, vague, or unhelpful comments.

Final Recommendation

Reviewers should clearly recommend one of the following:
  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject
Final decisions are made by the editor, but reviewer insight is essential.