Reviewer Guidelines
Essential guidelines for peer reviewers evaluating neurology and neuroscience manuscripts for JNRT.
Ensuring Quality Through Rigorous Review
Peer reviewers are essential to maintaining the scientific quality of neurology and neuroscience research published in JNRT. Your expert evaluation helps ensure that published work is accurate, methodologically sound, and appropriately interpreted. These guidelines outline expectations for reviewers and provide guidance on conducting thorough, constructive reviews that support authors in improving their neurological research manuscripts.
Reviewers are responsible for providing timely, thorough, and constructive evaluation of submitted neurology and neuroscience manuscripts within their area of expertise.
- Respond promptly to review invitations, accepting or declining within five days
- Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe, typically two to three weeks
- Evaluate scientific merit, methodological quality, and appropriate interpretation
- Provide specific, constructive feedback to help authors improve neurology work
- Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscript contents and reviewer identity
- Disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect objective evaluation
When evaluating neurology and neuroscience manuscripts, reviewers should assess multiple dimensions of quality and contribution to the field.
- Scientific significance and novelty of findings or methodology
- Appropriateness and rigor of experimental design and controls
- Quality and completeness of data presentation including neuroimaging
- Validity of statistical analysis and interpretation
- Clarity of writing and organization
- Appropriateness of conclusions relative to results
- Adequate citation of relevant prior neurology work
Reviews should be critical but respectful, focusing on scientific content rather than personal opinions. Provide specific suggestions for improvement, identify essential versus optional revisions, and acknowledge manuscript strengths alongside weaknesses. Your feedback should help authors produce the best possible version of their neurology work.
Manuscripts are confidential documents. Do not share content with colleagues, use manuscript information in your own neuroscience research before publication, or retain copies after review completion. Report suspected misconduct to the handling editor.
Submit reviews through the ManuscriptZone system, including overall recommendation, comments for authors, and confidential comments for editors. Structure feedback clearly to help authors understand required changes.
Become a Reviewer
Apply to join our reviewer pool and contribute to neurology and neuroscience publishing.
Register Now Reviewer Benefits
