Reviewer Guidelines

The International Journal of Embryo Cryobiology and Reproductive Sciences values the contribution of qualified reviewers in maintaining the quality, integrity, and reliability of published research. Reviewers are expected to provide fair, objective, confidential, and constructive assessments of submitted manuscripts.

1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers should:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and independently.
  • Assess the scientific quality and originality of the work.
  • Provide constructive and respectful comments.
  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
  • Identify ethical or research integrity concerns.
  • Submit reviews within the agreed timeframe.

2. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents. Reviewers should not:

  • Share the manuscript or review materials with others without permission.
  • Discuss unpublished findings with third parties.
  • Use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.
  • Upload confidential manuscript content to external AI or other systems that may compromise confidentiality.

3. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review.

A reviewer should decline the assignment when a conflict could affect their ability to provide an impartial assessment.

4. Scientific Evaluation

Reviewers should consider:

  • Originality and significance of the research.
  • Clarity of the research objectives.
  • Appropriateness of the methodology.
  • Quality and reliability of data.
  • Accuracy of analysis and interpretation.
  • Relevance of the conclusions.
  • Quality of tables, figures, and supplementary materials.
  • Adequacy and relevance of references.

5. Embryo Cryobiology and Reproductive Sciences

Where relevant, reviewers should carefully evaluate research involving:

  • Embryo cryopreservation and vitrification.
  • Cryoprotectants and freezing/thawing procedures.
  • Embryo viability and quality assessment.
  • Embryo culture and development.
  • Oocyte and sperm preservation.
  • Fertility and infertility research.
  • Assisted reproductive technologies.
  • Reproductive biology and embryology.
  • Reproductive genetics and molecular research.
  • Clinical and translational reproductive research.

6. Research Ethics

Reviewers should consider whether the research appears to follow appropriate ethical standards.

For studies involving human participants, patients, embryos, reproductive cells, or other sensitive biological materials, reviewers should consider whether appropriate ethical approval, informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality requirements have been addressed where applicable.

7. Originality and Plagiarism

Reviewers should alert the journal if they identify possible:

  • Plagiarism.
  • Duplicate or redundant publication.
  • Significant text recycling.
  • Unethical reuse of figures, tables, or data.
  • Suspicious similarities with previously published work.

Reviewers should report concerns to the editor rather than making accusations directly to the authors.

8. Data and Results

Reviewers should assess whether the reported results are adequately supported by the methods and data presented.

Concerns regarding possible fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or serious inconsistencies should be confidentially communicated to the editor.

9. Constructive Comments

Reviewer comments should be clear, professional, and helpful.

Reviewers should:

  • Explain significant concerns clearly.
  • Distinguish major issues from minor corrections.
  • Provide suggestions for improving the manuscript.
  • Avoid personal, offensive, or discriminatory comments.
  • Focus criticism on the research rather than the authors.

10. Recommendation

After completing the evaluation, reviewers may provide an overall recommendation to the editor, such as:

  • Accept.
  • Minor Revision.
  • Major Revision.
  • Reject.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team.

11. Artificial Intelligence

Reviewers should use AI tools cautiously and responsibly. Confidential manuscript content should not be entered into external AI systems where doing so could compromise confidentiality or intellectual property.

AI tools should not replace the reviewer's independent scientific judgment.

12. Reviewer Timeliness

Reviewers should complete their assessments within the requested timeframe. If additional time is required, reviewers should inform the editorial team as soon as possible.

If a reviewer cannot complete the review, they should decline the assignment promptly.

13. Reviewer Recognition

The journal may acknowledge the contributions of reviewers through appropriate editorial or scholarly recognition practices, subject to the journal's policies and applicable confidentiality requirements.

14. Final Reviewer Responsibility

Before submitting a review, reviewers should ensure that their comments are balanced, evidence-based, confidential, and relevant to the manuscript.

15. Commitment to Peer Review Quality

The International Journal of Embryo Cryobiology and Reproductive Sciences appreciates the contribution of reviewers who help strengthen the quality and integrity of scholarly communication. Through fair, confidential, and constructive peer review, reviewers contribute significantly to maintaining high standards of research and publication ethics.