Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Editorial
. 2025 Nov 17;10(2):7-10.
doi: 10.24908/pocusj.v10i02.20046. eCollection 2025 Nov.

A Guide to an Effective Peer Review

Affiliations
Editorial

A Guide to an Effective Peer Review

Tanping Wong et al. POCUS J. .

Abstract

Peer review is a fundamental element of the modern scientific publishing process. It serves an important role in evaluating the quality of research and refining submitted manuscripts into accurate and impactful contributions to the existing scientific literature. Over the last two decades, opportunities for publication have skyrocketed, and the demand for peer reviewers has grown exponentially. Although the peer review process provides significant benefits, recruiting individuals as peer reviewers can be challenging. The most common obstacles include the time commitment needed to provide meaningful reviews and uncertainty about how to prepare a cohesive and beneficial peer review. This article offers prospective peer reviewers structured guidance to build confidence and enable them to perform effective reviews.

Keywords: Critical appraisal; Manuscript evaluation; Peer review; Reviewer guidance; Scientific publishing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

References

    1. Alam M. How to Review a Manuscript [Editorial]. Dermatol Surg 2015;41:883–888. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000000421 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Altieri MS, Pawlik TM. Mentor of the Month Series: How to Review a Manuscript from an Editor's Perspective? J Gastrointest Surg 2020;24:1452–1454. doi: 10.1007/s11605-020-04567-w - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brown LM, David EA, Karamlou T, Nason KS. Reviewing scientific manuscripts: A comprehensive guide for peer reviewers. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017;153:1609–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.12.067 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Drozdz JA, Ladomery MR. The Peer Review Process: Past, Present, and Future. Br J Biomed Sci 2024;17;81:12054. doi: 10.3389/bjbs.2024.12054. - DOI
    1. Evans AT, McNutt RA, Fletcher SW, Fletcher RH. The Characteristics of Peer Reviewers Who Produce Good-quality Reviews. J Gen Intern Med 1993;8:422–428. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources