Instructions For Referees

 Instructions for Referees

General Principles

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of JARM – Journal of Aesthetic and Regenerative Medicine.

All manuscripts are evaluated through a peer-review process based on principles of objectivity, confidentiality, and scientific rigor.

Reviewer Invitation

Reviewers are invited via email by the Editorial Office. The invitation includes:

  • Title and abstract of the manuscript
  • Scope of the submission
  • Requested timeline for review
  • Link to access the manuscript

Reviewers are asked to accept or decline the invitation promptly.

Access to the Manuscript

Upon acceptance of the review assignment, reviewers can:

  • Access the full manuscript
  • Download associated files (figures, tables, supplementary materials)
  • View specific review instructions

All materials must be treated as confidential.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must:

  • Treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents
  • Not share or distribute the content
  • Not use unpublished data for personal or professional advantage

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on:

  • Scientific quality and originality
  • Methodological rigor
  • Clarity and organization
  • Relevance to the journal scope
  • Ethical standards

Constructive and objective feedback is expected.

Review Report

Reviewers are required to provide:

  • Comments for the Editor (confidential)
  • Comments for the Author (constructive and clear)
  • Specific suggestions for improvement

Comments should be professional, objective, and respectful.

Recommendation

At the end of the review, reviewers must select one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions
  • Reject

All recommendations should be supported by clear reasoning.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline the assignment if:

  • There is any conflict of interest
  • They have collaborated with the authors recently
  • They are unable to provide an objective evaluation

Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to complete the review within the requested timeframe.
If delays occur, the Editorial Office should be informed promptly.

Editorial Decision

Final decisions are made by the Editorial Team based on reviewer reports.
Reviewer recommendations are advisory but fundamental to the decision-making process.

Ethical Standards

The journal follows internationally recognized ethical standards, including:

  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)
  • ICMJE guidelines

Reviewers are expected to report:

  • Suspected plagiarism
  • Data inconsistencies
  • Ethical concerns

Final Note

The contribution of reviewers is essential to ensure the scientific quality, reliability, and credibility of the journal.