Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewers are essential to the integrity of glaucoma research. IJG reviewers provide expert evaluation that supports strong clinical and scientific conclusions.
These guidelines outline expectations for fair, timely, and constructive reviews.
Purpose of peer review
Peer review ensures that glaucoma research is accurate, ethical, and clinically meaningful. Reviewers evaluate study design, data integrity, and interpretation to support high quality publication decisions.
Review criteria
- Scientific rigor and methodological clarity
- Clinical relevance and impact on patient outcomes
- Appropriate statistical analysis and reporting
- Ethics, consent, and data transparency
Confidentiality and conflicts
Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential and disclose any conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, decline the review so that an independent assessment can be assigned.
Constructive feedback
Provide specific, actionable comments that help authors improve the manuscript. Distinguish between major issues that affect validity and minor edits that improve clarity.
Review structure
A well structured review helps editors make timely decisions and helps authors respond effectively.
- Brief summary of the study and its contribution
- Major concerns that affect validity or interpretation
- Minor comments related to clarity or formatting
- Recommendation with rationale for acceptance, revision, or rejection
If you cite additional literature in your review, include full references so authors can respond accurately.
Focus on scientific validity and clinical relevance rather than stylistic preferences when possible.
Reviewer Expectations
Rigor
Assess study design, methods, and statistical validity with a focus on clinical impact.
Constructive Feedback
Offer clear recommendations that guide authors toward stronger reporting and analysis.
Confidentiality
Protect manuscript content and avoid sharing data or results before publication.
Respecting Review Timelines
Timely reviews help authors and editors maintain momentum. If you cannot meet the requested deadline, notify the editorial office promptly.
We encourage reviewers to be respectful and evidence based in all feedback.
Professional tone improves author response quality.
Your review protects patients by improving evidence quality.
Need Guidance From Our Editorial Team?
We are happy to clarify policies, submission routes, and editorial requirements.
[email protected]Join Our Reviewer Community
Register as a reviewer and contribute to high quality glaucoma research.
