Modern Care Journal
Sun, Nov 1, 2026
[Archive]
Instructions for Reviewers
| Last update: 2026/02/3 |
Modern Care Journal follows a double-anonymized (double-blind) peer-review process. Manuscripts that are considered suitable for peer review are normally evaluated by at least three independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, methodological knowledge, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest. The Editor-in-Chief and Executive Manager are responsible for managing the peer-review process and making the final editorial decision.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers should:
* Evaluate manuscripts objectively, independently, and constructively.
* Assess the scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance of the manuscript.
* Identify important strengths and weaknesses and provide clear, specific, and evidence-based comments.
* Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript, its contents, and the review process.
* Not use, disclose, or take advantage of unpublished information or ideas obtained through peer review.
* Declare any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting an assignment.
* Decline the review if they lack the necessary expertise, cannot complete the review within the required timeframe, or have a conflict of interest.
* Inform the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, citation manipulation, or other forms of research or publication misconduct.
Confidentiality and Co-Reviewers
Reviewers must not share manuscripts or review materials with others without prior permission from the handling editor. If a reviewer wishes to involve a qualified colleague or trainee as a co-reviewer, they must obtain the editor’s permission in advance and ensure that the co-reviewer follows the same confidentiality and conflict-of-interest requirements. The identity and contribution of any approved co-reviewer should be disclosed to the editor.
Conducting the Review
Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the timeframe specified in the review invitation. If additional time is required, they should contact the editorial office as soon as possible.
Review reports should be professional, respectful, and sufficiently detailed to help authors improve their manuscript. Comments should distinguish between major and minor concerns and should focus on the scientific and scholarly content of the manuscript. Reviewers should not recommend unnecessary citations to their own work or the work of others for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decisions
Reviewers may recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection; however, the final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the reviewers’ comments, the scientific quality of the manuscript, and the journal’s editorial policies. Reviewers should not communicate editorial decisions directly to authors.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or reassessed by other reviewers when appropriate. Reviewers should evaluate whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised during the previous round of review.
Reviewer's checklist
The purpose of the peer review checklist is to facilitate the review process. Reviewers can to provide their comments directly within the manuscript file.[Reviewer's checklist]
Review Reports and Use of Reviews
Review reports are confidential communications to the journal and are used to support editorial decision-making. Reviewers should not reproduce, publish, transfer, or reuse their reports or the manuscript without permission from the journal. The journal may retain review reports as part of its editorial records.
Appeals and Further Review
Authors may appeal an editorial decision in accordance with the journal’s **Complaints and Appeals Policy**. Appeals are assessed independently and may involve additional editorial or external review when appropriate. Reviewers may be contacted to reassess a revised manuscript or to provide further clarification when necessary.
Modern Care Journal appreciates the contribution of reviewers to maintaining the quality, integrity, and reliability of the scholarly record.
How to Become a Reviewer:
The process of becoming a referee typically begins with an invitation from the editorial office. However, qualified scholars may also express their interest voluntarily. Applicants are encouraged to submit a formal application via the journal's website. The editorial board will review all applications and subsequently notify candidates regarding their status.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers should:
* Evaluate manuscripts objectively, independently, and constructively.
* Assess the scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance of the manuscript.
* Identify important strengths and weaknesses and provide clear, specific, and evidence-based comments.
* Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript, its contents, and the review process.
* Not use, disclose, or take advantage of unpublished information or ideas obtained through peer review.
* Declare any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting an assignment.
* Decline the review if they lack the necessary expertise, cannot complete the review within the required timeframe, or have a conflict of interest.
* Inform the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, citation manipulation, or other forms of research or publication misconduct.
Confidentiality and Co-Reviewers
Reviewers must not share manuscripts or review materials with others without prior permission from the handling editor. If a reviewer wishes to involve a qualified colleague or trainee as a co-reviewer, they must obtain the editor’s permission in advance and ensure that the co-reviewer follows the same confidentiality and conflict-of-interest requirements. The identity and contribution of any approved co-reviewer should be disclosed to the editor.
Conducting the Review
Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the timeframe specified in the review invitation. If additional time is required, they should contact the editorial office as soon as possible.
Review reports should be professional, respectful, and sufficiently detailed to help authors improve their manuscript. Comments should distinguish between major and minor concerns and should focus on the scientific and scholarly content of the manuscript. Reviewers should not recommend unnecessary citations to their own work or the work of others for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decisions
Reviewers may recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection; however, the final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the reviewers’ comments, the scientific quality of the manuscript, and the journal’s editorial policies. Reviewers should not communicate editorial decisions directly to authors.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or reassessed by other reviewers when appropriate. Reviewers should evaluate whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised during the previous round of review.
Reviewer's checklist
The purpose of the peer review checklist is to facilitate the review process. Reviewers can to provide their comments directly within the manuscript file.[Reviewer's checklist]
Review Reports and Use of Reviews
Review reports are confidential communications to the journal and are used to support editorial decision-making. Reviewers should not reproduce, publish, transfer, or reuse their reports or the manuscript without permission from the journal. The journal may retain review reports as part of its editorial records.
Appeals and Further Review
Authors may appeal an editorial decision in accordance with the journal’s **Complaints and Appeals Policy**. Appeals are assessed independently and may involve additional editorial or external review when appropriate. Reviewers may be contacted to reassess a revised manuscript or to provide further clarification when necessary.
Modern Care Journal appreciates the contribution of reviewers to maintaining the quality, integrity, and reliability of the scholarly record.
How to Become a Reviewer:
The process of becoming a referee typically begins with an invitation from the editorial office. However, qualified scholars may also express their interest voluntarily. Applicants are encouraged to submit a formal application via the journal's website. The editorial board will review all applications and subsequently notify candidates regarding their status.
View: 620 Time(s) | Print: 109 Time(s) | Email: 0 Time(s) |
0 Comment(s)
Other articles
