Guide for Reviewer

Before Accepting an Invitation to Review

Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, consider the following questions:

Q1. Expertise

Does the article match your area of expertise? Only accept if you feel you can provide a high-quality review.

Q2. Conflict of interest

Do you have a potential conflict of interest? Disclose this to the editor when you respond.

Q3. Time

Reviewing can be a lot of work — before you commit, make sure you can meet the deadline.

Reviewers must also be independent of the authors and free from institutional conflicts of interest — a reviewer from the same institution as any of the authors should decline the invitation.

How to Peer Review for TPB

The reviewer report should comprehensively critique the submission and consist of much more than a few brief sentences. TPB does not require a specific structure for reports; however, a suggested format is:

Summary Major issues Minor issues

We encourage reviewers to help authors improve their manuscripts. The report should give constructive analysis to authors, particularly where revisions are recommended. Where reviewers do not wish authors to see certain comments, these can be added to the confidential comments to the Editor-in-Chief.

Core Aspects to Critique

  • Are the research questions valid?
  • Is the sample size sufficient?
  • Is there necessary ethical approval and/or consent, and was the research ethical?
  • Are the methods and study design appropriate for answering the research question?
  • Do the experiments have appropriate controls?
  • Is the reporting of methods, equipment, and materials detailed enough for reproducibility?
  • Are statistical tests used appropriately and correctly reported?
  • Are the figures and tables clear and accurate?
  • Has prior research by the authors and others been discussed and compared?
  • Are there inappropriate citations — unsupportive, or excessive self-citation of the authors' own work?
  • Do the results support the conclusions?
  • Are limitations of the research acknowledged?
  • Is the abstract an accurate summary, without spin?
  • Is the language clear and understandable?

To help authors receive timely reviews, reviewer reports should be submitted via the manuscript tracking system on or before the agreed deadline. Reviewers should contact TPB if they are unable to meet the deadline so an alternative date can be arranged. Reviewers are asked to focus on objectively critiquing the scientific aspects of the submission — the soundness of the methodology and whether the conclusions are supported by the results — and may also comment on novelty and potential impact.

Recommended Actions

Accepted Minor Revision Major Revision Reject Unable to Review

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under peer review are strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share manuscripts or discuss their content with anyone outside the peer-review process. Reviewers may, on request, consult colleagues from their research group provided confidentiality is maintained; they should first seek approval from TPB or the Editor-in-Chief and note the colleague's name in the "Comments to the editor" section of their report. Reviewer identities are never disclosed to authors, consistent with TPB's double-blind peer-review policy.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should decline to review a submission when they:

  • Have a financial interest in the subject of the work.
  • Have previously discussed the manuscript with the authors.
  • Are affiliated with the same institution as any of the authors.
  • Feel unable to be objective for any other reason.

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Review

Reviewers must not upload manuscript content to generative AI tools, in order to protect author confidentiality and data integrity. Any use of AI-assisted tools within the review workflow must be disclosed to the editorial office in advance and does not replace the reviewer's own expert judgment.

Applications to Review

We appreciate applications to join our community of peer reviewers. The Editorial Board selects reviewers on a manuscript-by-manuscript basis, inviting the most appropriate scientists from their own specialty and/or publication list; suggestions submitted by authors do not guarantee selection, and TPB retains full editorial independence in appointing reviewers. To ensure we have your up-to-date contact details, interested reviewers should register for a user account.