How to review a journal paper critically

Abstract

Peer review is the cornerstone of publishing in Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Diversity of perspectives is an integral part of a successful vetting process. The editor, associate editors, and reviewers who examine each manuscript are the authors peers: persons with comparable standing in the same research field as the authors themselves. Peer review contributes to improving the quality of a published paper, ensures previous work is properly acknowledged, highlights the importance and novelty of the findings, detects plagiarism and fraud, and promotes academic career development. Reviewers help by providing a comprehensive analysis of the abstract, introduction and background, methodology, results and discussion, conclusion, references, tables and figures. Good reviewers provide a detailed and timely report supporting statements regarding whether the research is original, novel, and important to the field of ultrasound in medicine and biology. The top reviewers currently make up the advisory editorial board, whose names appear on the face page of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. However, an expanded list of multidisciplinary and international reviewers with broader capabilities are called on frequently. Either a list of page and line numbers accompanies specific comments and constructive criticism, or these comments are embedded in the portable document file (.pdf) of the submitted manuscript. Reviewers should be prepared to demonstrate objectivity, critique revised versions of the manuscript, as well as provide a clear recommendation whether the paper can be accepted for publication, requires minor or major modifications, or should be rejected altogether with no opportunity to revise. Tips for providing and navigating peer review in Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology will be reviewed and discussed.