Reviewer Resources
Tools and guidance for peer reviewers at Journal of Alzheimer's Research and Therapy (JALR).
Resources to support high quality reviews
JALR provides reviewers with clear guidance, templates, and support to make peer review efficient and constructive. These resources help reviewers focus on methodological rigor and clinical relevance. Your review supports patient care.
Reviewer checklist
Key questions for assessing study design, ethics, and reporting quality.
Structured review template
Organized format for major and minor comments to support clear feedback.
Reporting guidelines
Links to CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, and related standards.
Ethics guidance
Information on consent, conflicts of interest, and data transparency.
Use these resources to structure your review and to align your feedback with journal expectations. Consistent use of templates improves clarity for authors and editors.
- Focus on scientific validity and reproducibility.
- Provide respectful, actionable feedback.
- Disclose conflicts of interest promptly.
- Keep all review materials confidential.
Balanced reviews should acknowledge strengths as well as areas for improvement. This helps authors understand the value of their work and encourages constructive revision.
Reviewers receive clear timelines and can request extensions when needed. The editorial office can clarify scope questions, formatting standards, or reporting expectations.
If a manuscript includes complex analyses, reviewers should assess whether methods are appropriate and clearly reported. Highlight missing details, unclear assumptions, or unsupported conclusions so authors can address them.
If you suspect plagiarism, data manipulation, or ethical concerns, notify the editorial office immediately and provide a brief explanation. The journal will investigate and handle the issue confidentially.
For revisions, compare the author response letter with the updated manuscript. Confirm that key issues were addressed and note any remaining concerns that affect validity.
Set aside focused blocks of time for review. If you cannot meet the deadline, notify the editorial office early so alternative reviewers can be assigned.
Reviewers may request acknowledgement letters or certificates of service. Consistent, high quality reviews may lead to further opportunities with the journal.
If you have questions about a review, timelines, or ethical considerations, contact the editorial office. We are committed to supporting reviewers throughout the process and clarifying expectations and timelines. Support is always available.
Request reviewer resources
Email [email protected] to access reviewer tools or ask questions. We respond quickly.
