Guidelines for Reviewers

AME aims to provide a service to authors and the wider research community by making as much research available as possible, provided it meets our journal’s high standards for research conduct and ethical procedures and receives approval after peer review.

Transparent peer review

With a commitment to openness and accountability, and to increase the level of transparency throughout our peer review process, some AME journals have introduced a transparent peer review process as an option for authors upon submission. For journals that employ the transparent peer review process, the reviewer will be of notified of the transparent peer review policy in their reviewer invitation letter. Please refer to the website of the specific AME journal for more information.

Single-blind peer review

Unless otherwise indicated*, this process applies to all AME journals, meaning:

•   the reviewer’s name is NOT disclosed to the author

•   the author’s name is disclosed to the reviewer

*Please note that two AME journals, Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition and Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery, use double-blind peer review, which means that the identities of both the reviewer and the author are kept unknown to each other throughout the review process.

The role of reviewers

If we need your help with appraising a manuscript, we will send you an email and ask you to accept or decline the invitation through our submission system. We ask for reviewers’ assistance to ensure that any studies published in AME journals have been conducted properly, are scientifically credible and ethical, and are reported in accordance with the appropriate guidelines (e.g., CARE guidelines for case reports).

The Editorial Office is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript, based on the reviewers' comments.

We welcome feedback from our reviewers. If you have any comments you wish to make relating to a manuscript you have reviewed and our decision on it, or to our review process in general, we would be pleased to hear from you.

To become an AME journal reviewer

If you would like to volunteer to review a manuscript for our journal, please register at a specific journal submission website or log in to the ABER peer review system ( Your name, contact details, and expertise will be automatically added to our database of reviewers. Please inform us once you have registered.

Guidance for peer reviewers

All unpublished manuscripts are confidential documents. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than the peer reviewers and editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review and must not divulge any information about a specific manuscript or its content to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors. If we invite you to review an article and you choose to discuss the manuscript with a colleague, please remind them of the confidential nature of the paper and acknowledge their input in your review. Please also encourage colleagues to register as reviewers.

If you have any serious concerns about a manuscript in relation to publication ethics (e.g., if you believe you have encountered a case of plagiarism), you can contact the Editorial Office in confidence.

Writing your review

When you provide your review via our submission system, please declare any competing interests you may have in relation to the article. These could be personal, professional, or financial competing interests relevant to the paper being reviewed.

Before writing your review, you may find it helpful to browse our instructions for authors under the website of a specific journal.

To aid in the reviewing process, we ask authors to provide article summaries and to upload relevant reporting statements. We do not need you to comment on the work's importance to general readers; please only consider its scientific reliability and ethical conduct.

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by a journal editor. Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria: the material is original and timely; the manuscript is written clearly; appropriate study methods have been used; the data are valid; the conclusions are reasonable and well supported by the data; and the information contained in the manuscript is important, topical, and medically relevant. From these basic criteria, the editors assess a paper’s eligibility for publication. Other manuscripts are sent to expert consultants for peer review. Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed to improve the quality of the editorial or peer review processes. Identifying information remains confidential. Final decisions regarding the publication of a manuscript are made within the Editorial Team.

We are very grateful to all of the reviewers who have supported our journal so far.


Updated on April 26, 2020