Editors Guidelines
Editorial stewardship for hematology and oncology research with clinical impact.
Editors at the Journal of Hematology and Oncology Research (JHOR) serve as scientific stewards who uphold rigor, integrity, and patient relevance. Each decision should reflect the journals mission to publish evidence that advances hematology, oncology, and related translational sciences while improving outcomes for patients and health systems.
These guidelines provide a shared framework for fair assessment, ethical compliance, and constructive communication. Editors are expected to apply consistent standards across study designs, clinical settings, and geographic contexts.
Scope Alignment
JHOR prioritizes clinically meaningful research in malignant and benign hematology, solid and hematologic oncology, precision medicine, immunotherapy, diagnostics, outcomes research, and supportive care. Manuscripts should make a clear contribution to patient care, translational understanding, or health systems performance.
- Confirm that the disease area, population, and intervention align with hematology or oncology practice.
- Evaluate whether the findings are clinically actionable or advance mechanistic insight with translational relevance.
- Ensure the manuscript adds new knowledge beyond incremental or redundant analyses.
Title and Abstract Quality
The title should reflect the main outcome or finding without overstatement. The abstract must provide a structured summary of objectives, methods, results, and conclusions in clear clinical language.
Methods and Statistics
- Study design is appropriate for the clinical question and reported transparently.
- Population, inclusion criteria, and endpoints are clearly defined.
- Statistical methods are suitable, reproducible, and include effect sizes and confidence intervals.
- Sample size justification and power considerations are described when relevant.
Results and Interpretation
Results should be logically organized with complete tables and figures. The discussion must interpret findings with clinical context, acknowledge limitations, and avoid claims not supported by data.
Editors must ensure that submissions comply with ethical requirements and publication standards. Studies involving human participants require IRB approval and informed consent; animal studies must follow institutional and national guidelines.
- Verify ethics approval statements and clinical trial registration where applicable.
- Screen for plagiarism, duplicate publication, or salami slicing of datasets.
- Watch for image manipulation, inappropriate statistical reporting, or missing data explanations.
- Require conflict of interest disclosure, funding statements, and author contribution details.
JHOR follows COPE guidance for handling suspected misconduct. When concerns arise, editors should document evidence, consult editorial leadership, and follow established investigation protocols.
Selecting Reviewers
- Match reviewers to the manuscript topic and methodology.
- Avoid conflicts of interest and ensure reviewer diversity where possible.
- Consider a statistical reviewer for complex analyses or trial designs.
Review Quality and Timeliness
Editors should monitor review quality and timeliness. If a review is superficial, delayed, or biased, seek an additional reviewer. Clear reviewer guidance improves consistency and fairness.
Decisions should be evidence based, consistent, and transparent. Editors must balance novelty, methodological rigor, and clinical relevance. When issuing a decision, summarize key strengths and weaknesses and explain the rationale clearly for authors.
- Accept when the work is rigorous, clinically meaningful, and clearly reported.
- Request revisions when issues are addressable through clarification, analysis, or additional context.
- Reject when the manuscript is out of scope, methodologically flawed, or lacks clinical relevance.
Professional tone is essential. Provide constructive guidance, particularly for early career authors or global submissions where resource constraints may affect presentation quality.
Editors should apply standards consistently across geography, institution type, and author seniority. Guard against unconscious bias by focusing on the strength of evidence, clarity of reporting, and clinical value rather than affiliation or perceived prestige.
- Assess novelty within the context of regional practice and resource settings.
- Consider whether conclusions are supported by data, not by author reputation.
- Encourage inclusive citations and acknowledgment of related global research.
When work addresses underserved populations or low resource settings, evaluate whether outcomes are meaningful for those contexts and whether limitations are transparently described.
Encourage authors to follow established reporting guidelines to improve reproducibility and clarity.
- CONSORT for randomized trials.
- STROBE for observational studies.
- PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta analyses.
- CARE for case reports.
- ARRIVE for animal studies.
Ensure data availability statements are present and appropriate for the study type. Data sharing should be encouraged when ethical and feasible.
Editors should review figures and supplementary materials for clarity, accuracy, and integrity. Look for image manipulation, inconsistent labeling, or missing data descriptions. When specialized imaging or genomic data are presented, ensure that methods and controls are described in sufficient detail for interpretation.
- Confirm that figure legends are complete and aligned with the results.
- Check that supplementary files include protocols or additional analyses that support key claims.
- Request raw data or original image files when integrity questions arise.
AI assisted tools may be used for language support or exploratory analysis, but authors must disclose use and remain accountable for accuracy. Editors should verify that AI tools did not introduce unsupported claims or altered interpretations. Any AI generated imagery is not acceptable for clinical data presentation.
Clinical Trials and Real World Evidence
Trials and real world evidence studies must report clinically meaningful endpoints, adverse events, and patient outcomes. Editors should assess whether trial registration is current and whether protocol deviations are transparently described.
Case Reports and Case Series
Case based submissions should offer clear learning value and advance clinical practice or hypothesis generation. Editors should confirm patient consent and anonymization.
Translational and Biomarker Studies
Translational studies should connect laboratory findings to clinical relevance. Biomarker claims should be supported by validation and outcome correlations.
Special Issues and Invited Content
For special issues or invited submissions, apply the same standards as regular manuscripts. Ensure transparency around guest editor roles, reviewer selection, and conflicts of interest. Special issues should advance priority themes in hematology and oncology without lowering review rigor.
Editors should evaluate revisions by comparing author responses to reviewer comments and verifying that changes align with the requested improvements. Appeals must be handled respectfully with documented rationale and, when needed, additional independent review.
Post publication issues, including corrections or retractions, should be managed promptly and in accordance with COPE recommendations.
JHOR prioritizes outcomes that matter to patients, clinicians, and health systems. Editors should check that manuscripts report clinically meaningful endpoints such as survival, progression, toxicity, quality of life, and functional status. When surrogate endpoints are used, the rationale and clinical relevance should be clearly stated.
- Ensure adverse events and safety data are reported transparently.
- Evaluate whether outcomes are interpretable for real world care settings.
- Encourage patient reported outcomes or caregiver impact where appropriate.
Editors play a key role in supporting authors while maintaining standards. When language clarity limits interpretation, recommend professional editing through the Language Editing Service. Encourage authors to review the Editorial Policies for compliance requirements.
Editors should aim for timely initial screening, responsive communication, and consistent decision quality. Document key decision points and maintain confidentiality throughout the process. Consistent documentation supports audit trails, editorial training, and transparency for future decision reviews. The goal is to protect scientific integrity while helping strong manuscripts reach publication efficiently.
Editorial excellence supports better outcomes for hematology and oncology patients. Last updated: January 2026.
