Reviewer Policies
1. Reviewers Guidelines
The Global Journal of Cardiology relies on a rigorous and fair peer review process to ensure that only high-quality research is published. The Reviewers Guidelines are designed to help reviewers understand their responsibilities and the standards expected from them during the evaluation process.
Reviewers are asked to assess submitted manuscripts on several key criteria, including the originality, scientific validity, clarity of the methodology, and relevance of the findings to the field of cardiology. They should evaluate the paper's research design, statistical analysis, data presentation, and interpretation of results. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback to the authors, offering suggestions for improvement and highlighting any weaknesses in the study design or analysis. Feedback should be detailed and focused on enhancing the quality of the manuscript.
Confidentiality is a crucial aspect of the review process. Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not discuss the paper with anyone outside the peer review process, nor should they use the information contained in the manuscript for personal or professional gain. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest that may bias their evaluation, they must recuse themselves from reviewing that manuscript.
Reviewers are encouraged to complete their assessments promptly. A timely review ensures that authors can receive feedback quickly, which facilitates the smooth and efficient publication of quality research. The Global Journal of Cardiology places great importance on the reviewer’s role in maintaining the journal's integrity, and reviewers are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards throughout the evaluation process.
2. Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (specific to reviewers)
The Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures policy for reviewers ensures the integrity of the peer review process by promoting transparency and minimizing bias in manuscript evaluations. Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. These conflicts could include any financial, personal, or professional relationships with the authors or the subject matter of the paper that might influence their judgment.
Common conflicts of interest include but are not limited to:
- Financial interests: A reviewer may have financial stakes in a company whose products or services are related to the research being evaluated.
- Personal relationships: A reviewer may have close personal ties with one of the authors, such as a mentor, collaborator, or relative.
- Professional biases: A reviewer may have competing research or be in direct professional competition with the authors, which could impact their impartiality.
If a potential conflict of interest exists, the reviewer must disclose it to the editorial board. In such cases, the reviewer may be recused from evaluating the manuscript to ensure that the peer review process remains unbiased and transparent.
Financial disclosures are also required to maintain transparency. Reviewers must declare any financial relationships they have with entities that might have an interest in the outcome of the research. These disclosures help ensure that the reviewer’s decisions are not unduly influenced by external factors.
The Global Journal of Cardiology aims to maintain the highest standards of ethics and impartiality. By requiring the disclosure of conflicts of interest, the journal ensures that the review process is based solely on the scientific merit of the submitted work, free from any undue influence. This transparency in the peer review process fosters trust and credibility within the scientific community.
Reviewers who fail to disclose conflicts of interest or provide biased reviews may be removed from the journal’s reviewer pool and may face sanctions, including exclusion from future review activities.
