Editor Register

Apply to support depression and therapy publishing.

• Established expertise in depression, therapy, or mental health research
• Publication record demonstrating clinical or translational impact
• Commitment to ethical and transparent peer review
• Availability to manage reviews and decisions

• Full name, affiliation, and contact details
• Areas of expertise and research focus
• Recent publications or clinical leadership roles
• ORCID identifier if available
• Statement of interest in editorial service

Provide concise details so the editorial office can review fit quickly.

• Provide primary research and clinical focus areas
• Share recent publications or leadership roles
• List institutional affiliation and contact details
• Provide ORCID identifier if available
• Describe experience with peer review
• Confirm availability for review assignments
• Disclose conflicts of interest or competing roles
• List methodological or statistical strengths
• State preferred article types to handle
• Provide a brief statement of interest
• Share language proficiencies if relevant
• Confirm willingness to follow journal policies

Consistent engagement supports timely decisions.

• Encourage consistent use of reporting checklists
• Promote fair and unbiased peer review
• Document key decisions for accountability
• Provide guidance on revision expectations
• Support authors with clear feedback
• Ensure reviewer diversity and balance
• Monitor reviewer responsiveness
• Address ethical concerns promptly
• Maintain confidentiality throughout review
• Coordinate with production teams when needed

Complete, well structured submissions move through review more efficiently and reduce follow up questions.

Structured decisions improve consistency and fairness.

• Document key strengths and weaknesses
• Clarify revision requirements for authors
• Recommend statistical review when needed
• Ensure conflicts are addressed early
• Encourage adherence to reporting standards
• Maintain clear communication timelines
• Track reviewer performance and responsiveness
• Use checklists to standardize decisions
• Support constructive reviewer feedback
• Escalate ethical concerns promptly

These small checks help keep manuscripts and communications consistent.

• Keep terminology consistent across sections
• Confirm that tables match reported results
• Use clear headings that guide reviewers
• Provide concise summaries of key findings
• Check that ethics statements are visible
• Align figures with outcome descriptions
• Include clinical implications in discussion
• Verify that all links are current

Quality checks reduce revision cycles and accelerate review.

• Use plain language for complex findings
• Avoid unnecessary jargon or acronyms
• Ensure methods are described in sequence
• Clarify participant flow and attrition
• Report baseline characteristics clearly
• State limitations and generalizability
• Include acknowledgments where needed
• Double check citation formatting