Reviewer Benefits

Recognition and development opportunities for ENT reviewers.

Reviewer service demonstrates expertise and commitment to evidence based ENT care. Reviewers are acknowledged for their contributions.

Reviewers gain early insight into new otolaryngology research, surgical techniques, and diagnostic advances before publication.

Reviewing strengthens critical appraisal skills, research literacy, and methodological expertise. These skills support clinical decision making and academic growth.

JOA provides service acknowledgments and certificates upon request. These documents support professional evaluations and academic promotion.

Consistent, high quality reviews can lead to invitations for editorial service or guest editor roles on special issues.

Reviewer feedback improves study design and helps authors communicate findings to clinicians. This service strengthens the ENT evidence base and supports better patient outcomes.

Reviewers must keep manuscripts confidential and use submitted data only for review purposes. Any conflicts of interest should be disclosed so assignments can be reassigned if needed.

Ethical concerns, including potential plagiarism or data integrity issues, should be reported to the editorial office with clear evidence.

Professional, respectful feedback strengthens the review process and protects the scholarly record.

• Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts
• Disclose conflicts before accepting
• Flag ethics concerns to editors
• Provide objective, evidence based feedback
• Respect reviewer deadlines

Reviewer service improves critical appraisal skills and provides early access to emerging ENT research. These insights can inform clinical practice and future studies.

JOA acknowledges reviewer contributions and offers certificates or service documentation on request.

Consistent, high quality reviews can lead to invitations for editorial roles or special issue participation.

• Recognition for review service
• Certificates for professional records
• Opportunities for editorial advancement
• Improved critical appraisal skills
• Networking within ENT research

Reviewers receive structured templates and guidance on evaluating study design, outcomes, and ethical compliance. This support helps deliver consistent, actionable feedback.

If questions arise during review, the editorial office can provide clarification on scope, reporting standards, or conflict of interest expectations.

Clear communication strengthens review quality and improves author experience.

• Structured review templates
• Guidance on reporting standards
• Support for ethics questions
• Clarification on scope alignment
• Timely response expectations

Reviews are typically expected within 14 to 21 days. If additional time is required, notify the editorial office early.

Prompt reviews support the journal's decision timelines and improve author satisfaction.

• Confirm availability before accepting
• Communicate delays early
• Submit reviews on schedule

High quality reviews focus on study design, outcomes, and clarity. Comment on strengths as well as limitations so authors can improve clinical relevance and reporting quality.

When suggesting revisions, explain why changes are needed and cite specific sections to guide authors efficiently.

• Assess methods and outcomes clearly
• Check ethics approvals and consent
• Review figures and data accuracy
• Note gaps in clinical interpretation