Reviewer Guidelines

The Annals of Proteomics and Bioinformatics (APB) relies on the expertise of qualified reviewers to ensure the integrity, scientific quality, and ethical soundness of published research. These guidelines define the responsibilities, principles, and review procedures that reviewers must follow when evaluating manuscripts.

The journal follows a double-blind peer review process and adheres to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review serves as a critical quality control step, ensuring that only methodologically sound and original research is published. Reviewers provide constructive feedback to help authors improve clarity, accuracy, and impact of their work.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and confidentially.
  • Provide timely, clear, and evidence-based comments.
  • Avoid personal bias or criticism.
  • Report any suspected ethical or scientific misconduct.

3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts and supplementary materials must be treated as strictly confidential documents. They should not be shared or discussed with others without explicit permission from the editor.

Unpublished data or findings obtained through the review process must never be used for personal research or advantage.

4. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, or personal) that may bias their evaluation. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the invitation to review.

5. Review Process

  1. Accept or decline review invitations promptly.
  2. Read the manuscript carefully, focusing on originality, methods, results, and ethical compliance.
  3. Provide constructive comments for both authors and editors.
  4. Submit the report within the assigned timeframe (typically 2–3 weeks).
Reviews must be submitted through the OJS online review system to ensure traceability and confidentiality.

6. Evaluation Criteria

Aspect Evaluation Focus
Originality Novel contribution to proteomics or bioinformatics research
Scientific Rigor Appropriate methodology and reproducibility
Data Integrity Accuracy, transparency, and ethical compliance
Presentation Clarity, logical structure, and English proficiency
References Relevance and accuracy of citations

7. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should report any indication of:

  • Plagiarism or duplication of published work
  • Fabricated or manipulated data
  • Unethical use of human or animal subjects
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Any concerns should be communicated confidentially to the handling editor.

8. Constructive Feedback

Reviews should be written respectfully, providing actionable suggestions for improvement. Comments should be specific and supported by references when necessary.

Avoid vague statements such as “needs improvement” — instead specify what aspect requires attention.

9. Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to submit their evaluations within the deadline assigned. If additional time is needed, they must inform the editor in advance.

10. Anonymity and Communication

APB maintains a double-blind review model: reviewer identities remain hidden from authors and vice versa. All communication regarding manuscripts must take place through the OJS system only.

11. AI Assistance and Review Tools

Reviewers may use AI-assisted tools for grammar or similarity checks but not for generating content or judgments. Final evaluations must be written in the reviewer’s own words.

12. Recognition and Certification

APB acknowledges reviewers’ contributions through annual appreciation certificates and verified reviewer recognition in databases such as Publons or ORCID.

13. Reporting Misconduct

If reviewers suspect ethical violations, they should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief. All reports will be handled confidentially following COPE’s flowchart on handling misconduct.

14. Continuous Professional Development

Reviewers are encouraged to stay updated with ethical standards by attending COPE or WAME webinars and completing reviewer training modules.

15. Contact Information

© 2025 Annals of Proteomics and Bioinformatics (APB) · Heighten Sciences Publication Incorporation

Source Reference: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, ICMJE Recommendations (2024), WAME Reviewer Policy, and DOAJ Best Practices for Review Integrity.