Checklists help reviewers assess methods, results, ethics, and public health relevance. They ensure that key issues are addressed and provide a structured approach to complex manuscripts. They save time and stress.

Sample reviews illustrate how to structure feedback, distinguish major from minor issues, and provide constructive guidance. New reviewers can use these samples to build confidence.

Templates guide the organization of comments into major and minor issues. This structure helps editors prioritize revisions and supports consistent editorial decisions.

Resources include reminders to evaluate study design, sample size justification, and appropriate statistical tests. Reviewers can request help when results are complex or when reporting is unclear.

Reviewers receive prompts to assess whether findings are clinically meaningful and applicable to public health practice. This ensures that air and water borne disease research remains aligned with real world outcomes.

Resources include reminders on conflicts of interest, informed consent, and clinical trial registration. Reviewers can request guidance on reporting standards such as CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, and ORION. These reminders help protect patients and ensure compliance with funder requirements. Use them especially for clinical trials, outbreak reports, and environmental sampling studies as needed.

Reviewer resources highlight confidentiality expectations and discourage the use of unpublished data. This protects author work and maintains the integrity of peer review.

Editors may request clarification on specific points raised in your review. Resources include short response templates to help you reply quickly and maintain consistency.

Guidance is available on structuring review time, prioritizing major issues, and providing concise feedback. These tips help you deliver timely reviews without sacrificing quality.

The editorial office is available to answer questions about review scope, ethics concerns, or manuscript handling. Reviewers can reach out for clarification at any time.

Some submissions require scoring for novelty, methods, and public health impact. Use consistent ratings and explain low scores with evidence. Request clarification on statistical issues if needed.