Confidentiality
Treat manuscript materials as confidential throughout review.
Peer Review Guidance
Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewer Guidelines
Journal of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Provide rigorous, constructive, and timely peer review that strengthens publication quality across JOC submissions.
%
45%APC Savings
#
ClinicalResearch Community
OA
24/7Open Access
Review Standards
Guidelines for JOC Peer Reviewers
Reviewers are expected to provide evidence-based, constructive, and policy-aligned evaluations.
High-quality reviews focus on validity, reproducibility, and interpretation limits rather than stylistic preference.
Clear distinction between major scientific concerns and minor presentation edits improves decision utility.
Evaluation Priorities
What to Assess First
A structured review sequence improves consistency and editorial usefulness.
- Is the study question clinically meaningful and aligned with design?
- Are methods and analyses transparent enough for reproducibility?
- Do conclusions remain proportional to evidence strength and limitations?
- Are ethics, funding, and conflict disclosures complete?
- Are tables and figures consistent with narrative claims?
- Are references sufficient and appropriately interpreted?
Review comments should cite specific sections or figures to support efficient revision verification.
Constructive and neutral language helps authors improve quality while preserving fairness.
Professional Conduct
Confidentiality, Neutrality, and Timeliness
Reviewer professionalism is central to credible editorial outcomes.
Conflict Disclosure
Decline assignments where competing interests may affect neutrality.
Recommendation Neutrality
Avoid unrelated citation requests or non-evidence-based demands.
Timely Completion
Submit reviews within agreed timelines to support efficient decision-making.
Review reports should focus on validity, reproducibility, and interpretive limits.
Line-linked comments are more actionable than broad non-specific critiques.
Constructive language improves revision quality and editorial efficiency.
Confidentiality and conflict rules should be followed without exception.
Timely review delivery supports faster decisions for clinically relevant studies.
Review reports should focus on validity, reproducibility, and interpretive limits.
Line-linked comments are more actionable than broad non-specific critiques.
Constructive language improves revision quality and editorial efficiency.
Confidentiality and conflict rules should be followed without exception.
Timely review delivery supports faster decisions for clinically relevant studies.
Review reports should focus on validity, reproducibility, and interpretive limits.
Line-linked comments are more actionable than broad non-specific critiques.
Constructive language improves revision quality and editorial efficiency.
Confidentiality and conflict rules should be followed without exception.
Timely review delivery supports faster decisions for clinically relevant studies.
Review reports should focus on validity, reproducibility, and interpretive limits.
Line-linked comments are more actionable than broad non-specific critiques.
Contribute as a JOC Reviewer
Apply these review standards to support fair and high-confidence editorial decisions.
Editorial office: [email protected]
