Expertise and availability
Accept an invitation only when the manuscript fits your HIV/AIDS expertise, you have adequate time and you have no relevant conflict of interest.
JCRHAP peer review
For Reviewers
Practical guidance for reviewers helping editors assess HIV/AIDS research with expertise, confidentiality and constructive scientific feedback.
Peer review strengthens the scholarly record
Reviewers provide expert evaluation that supports editorial decision-making. A useful review explains whether the evidence is sound, identifies opportunities to improve the reporting and treats authors and their research with professional respect.
Reviewer expectations
These responsibilities consolidate the verified guidance currently spread across the reviewer-guidelines, reviewer-resources and reviewer-registration pages.
Scientific evaluation
Assess scientific rigour, methodology, novelty, significance and whether conclusions are supported by the findings.
Constructive feedback
Provide respectful, specific comments that identify strengths, explain concerns and help authors improve the manuscript.
Confidentiality and integrity
Keep manuscript content confidential, do not use submitted information for personal research, and report suspected ethical concerns to the editorial office.
A useful framework for evaluating a manuscript
Scientific validity
Are the methods appropriate for the HIV research question, and are the conclusions supported by the evidence?
Originality and significance
Does the work add meaningful knowledge for HIV/AIDS science, clinical practice or future research?
Clarity and reporting
Is the manuscript well organised, clearly written and sufficiently transparent about its methods and outcomes?
Ethical conduct
Does the research address the ethical standards applicable to HIV studies, including consent and protection of sensitive information where relevant?
Responding to a review invitation
Make a realistic commitment. If you are not able to provide a fair and thoughtful review, declining early helps the editor identify another suitable reviewer.
Before accepting
Check the subject fit, your availability and any potential conflict of interest. Decline promptly when you cannot provide a fair, useful review.
During review
Use the review form provided with the invitation. Focus comments on the evidence, reporting and clinical or research relevance.
If an issue arises
Contact the editor or editorial office if you need clarification, require more time or identify a potential ethical concern.
Support and acknowledgement
JCRHAP’s current reviewer resources describe review forms, evaluation guidance and editorial-office support for questions about scope, reporting standards or conflicts of interest.
Review guidance
Use the supplied review form and guidance to provide structured comments on study design, outcomes, reporting and ethical compliance.
Service documentation
Reviewers can request certificates or service documentation for professional records.
Join the JCRHAP reviewer pool.
Register your HIV/AIDS subject expertise and current availability so the editorial team can consider you for suitable review invitations.
Related journal guidance
Peer review, ethics, authorship and publication-record standards.
The HIV/AIDS research remit used to assess manuscript fit.
Consolidated editor guidance.
The preparation and reporting guidance authors are asked to follow.
Contribute to careful, constructive HIV/AIDS peer review.
Register your expertise and availability to be considered for a suitable JCRHAP review invitation.