Editors Guidelines
Expectations and best practices for JOM editorial board members and guest editors.
Editorial Excellence in Obesity Medicine
Editors shape the scientific quality and clinical relevance of JOM through fair, rigorous evaluation of submissions.
These guidelines support consistent, ethical editorial practice across all decision-making in obesity research.
Editors evaluate manuscripts based on scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to obesity management. Decisions are independent, fair, and timely. Editors maintain confidentiality and recuse themselves from conflicts of interest.
Fair Evaluation
Assess manuscripts on scientific merit without regard to author identity, affiliation, or nationality.
Confidentiality
Protect manuscript content and reviewer identities throughout the review process.
Conflict Management
Declare and recuse from decisions involving personal, professional, or financial conflicts.
Editors synthesize reviewer feedback, assess methodological quality, and evaluate contribution to the field. Decisions should be communicated clearly with constructive feedback. Major revisions should include specific guidance for authors.
- Consider all reviewer recommendations carefully
- Provide clear rationale for editorial decisions
- Offer constructive feedback even for rejected manuscripts
- Escalate uncertain cases to senior editors
Ethics priority: Editors must flag potential ethics concerns including inadequate consent documentation, missing trial registration, and research integrity issues for investigation.
Prompt decision-making respects author time and maintains submission flow. Editors should complete initial assessments within two weeks and communicate decisions promptly after review completion. Delays should be communicated proactively to authors.
Join Our Editorial Team
Contribute to advancing obesity management through editorial service.
Apply to Join
