INFORMATION FOR REVIEWERS
Dear reviewers,
The editorial team will send you an invitation to review, along with a copy of the abstract, via email. Should you accept the invitation, you will subsequently receive a review form, the manuscript itself, or a link to access the full text. Once you have completed your evaluation, we kindly ask that you submit your feedback to pomocnik.urednika@medicinskipregled.rs.
By agreeing to undertake this review, you confirm that you have no conflicting interests that could compromise your ability to provide an objective assessment. Reviewer comments should be submitted in the following format: a statement of opinion in the Review Form addressing all relevant points; comments intended for direct sharing with the authors and co-reviewers; and confidential comments reserved for the Editorial Board.
As you offer constructive feedback, it is essential to highlight both the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. Please be specific and use examples from the text to illustrate your points, suggesting improvements where appropriate. Additionally, assess the structure and organisation of the material, ensuring that it is well-organised, with sections presented in a logical order and a coherent overall flow. Verify the technical accuracy by checking any claims, data, or references made in the submission, and note any discrepancies or errors. Numbering your comments is encouraged, as this facilitates both the authors’ responses and the editor’s evaluation. Maintain a respectful and professional tone in your feedback, focusing on the work itself rather than personal criticisms. Your comments should be candid yet professional, aimed at enhancing the overall quality of the manuscript and guiding the authors towards effective revisions.
You are invited to provide additional confidential comments for the Editors, including your reasons for either enthusiasm or reservations regarding the manuscript, as well as your assessment of its potential to make a significant contribution if properly revised. When offering your insights, please avoid reiterating comments that have already been addressed to the authors. Instead, focus on providing constructive feedback that will assist the Editors in their decision-making process.
Finally, please provide a recommendation regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication. You may recommend acceptance as is, requiring only minimal revisions or clarifications without the need for re-review. If the manuscript can likely be accepted after addressing minor revisions that do not involve significant changes to the data or organisation, it should be marked as acceptable with minor revisions. If substantial revisions are needed but the manuscript shows promise, it can be classified as needing major revision. Conversely, if the manuscript fails to meet the necessary standards of quality, novelty, or importance, it should be classified as rejected.
Please remember to treat the submission as confidential; do not discuss it with others or use the information for personal gain. Lastly, we kindly ask that you adhere to the review timeline provided to ensure timely feedback within three weeks.
Thank you once again for your invaluable contribution to this process. Your expertise plays a vital role in upholding the quality and integrity of our work!