Reviewers evaluate article submissions to journals based on the requirements of that journal, predefined criteria, and the quality, completeness and accuracy of the research presented. They provide feedback on the paper, suggest improvements and make a recommendation to the editor about whether to accept, reject or request changes to the article. The ultimate decision always rests with the editor but reviewers play a significant role in determining the outcome.

Reviewing is a time-intensive process – writing a review report can be almost as much work as writing a manuscript! – but it is very worthwhile for the reviewer as well as for the community.

Reviewers:

• ensure the rigorous standards of the scientific process by taking part in the peer-review system.
• uphold the integrity of the journal by identifying invalid research, and helping to maintain the quality of the journal.
• fulfil a sense of obligation to the community and their own area of research.
• establish relationships with reputable colleagues and their affiliated journals, and increase their opportunities to join an Editorial Board.
• can help prevent ethical breaches by identifying plagiarism, research fraud and other problems by dint of their familiarity with the subject area.
• reciprocate professional courtesy, as authors and reviewers are often interchangeable roles – as reviewer, researchers "repay" the same consideration they receive as authors.

Peer review reports as articles

The publishing peer review reports pilot publicly recognized reviewers’ intellectual contribution to accepted articles through the official publication of their reports. Review reports were attributed a separate DOI and published next to the accepted paper on Science Direct. If you are new to reviewing, you are urged to consult a few of these reports to get a feel for how to provide feedback yourself.

Reviewer feedback programme

We regularly survey reviewers to get a better understanding of their needs and how we’re doing when it comes to meeting them. Findings from the reviewer feedback programme help us to improve the reviewing experience. For example, 90% of reviewers said they would like to be able to see the final decision and other reviewers’ comments on a paper, so we added this functionality to the electronic submission system.

The reviewer feedback programme monitors AHIT’s performance from the perspective of reviewers on AHIT journals. We’ll ask you about various aspects of the reviewing system and other aspects of reviewing via an online survey. Areas of interaction and support are measured and reported regularly. AHIT’s performance is benchmarked against that of other publishers.

If you have been asked to complete our reviewer feedback programme online survey, we strongly recommend you complete it to make sure your voice is heard.