Editors ensure manuscripts align with scope and ethical standards before peer review.

Select reviewers with relevant leukemia expertise and monitor timely responses.

Provide clear decisions supported by reviewer feedback and methodological evaluation.

Editors should document decision rationale for transparency and audit readiness.

Editors should confirm ethics compliance before review assignment.

Clear decision letters support efficient author responses.

Document decision rationale for transparency and audit readiness.

Use reviewer reminders thoughtfully to maintain timelines.

Encourage adherence to reporting guidelines and data transparency.

Confirm reviewer expertise aligns with manuscript scope.

Maintain clear records of reviewer comments and decisions.

Encourage authors to respond with point-by-point revisions.

Escalate ethical concerns to the editorial office promptly.

Confirm reviewer conflicts are addressed before assignment.

Ensure decisions align with journal scope and clinical relevance.

Support constructive communication with authors and reviewers.

Verify that reviewer comments are balanced and evidence-based.

Encourage authors to clarify clinical implications in revisions.

Ensure timelines are communicated clearly to all stakeholders.

Provide guidance to reviewers on expected timelines and depth.

Encourage detailed methods reporting for reproducibility.

Confirm that ethics and data statements are complete.

Escalate complex cases for senior editorial review.

Maintain clear communication with authors on revisions.

Document ethical concerns and resolution steps.

Ensure reviewer selection reflects topic expertise.

Ensure decision outcomes are communicated clearly and promptly.

Track reviewer performance for future assignments.

Maintain transparency in revision expectations.

Encourage clear reporting of methods and limitations.

Provide authors with structured revision expectations.

Confirm that reviewer conflicts are addressed promptly.

Ensure decisions align with journal scope and standards.

Provide consistent guidance on revision quality.

Confirm that decision letters include clear action items.

Maintain professional tone and consistency across decisions.

Encourage transparency in reviewer feedback and author responses.

Support timely handling of revisions and final decisions.

Maintain confidentiality and disclose conflicts of interest.

Encourage adherence to reporting guidelines and data transparency.