Reviewer GuidelinesInternational Journal of Blood Transfusion
Reviewers strengthen transfusion research by evaluating methods, clarity, and clinical relevance.
Principles of Peer Review
Provide objective, evidence based feedback that improves methodology and reporting clarity.
What to Evaluate
Assess study design, statistical analysis, patient relevance, and data integrity. Flag concerns about bias, reproducibility, or ethical compliance.
Confidentiality and Conflicts
Maintain confidentiality and decline reviews if conflicts could affect impartiality.
Clinical Impact and Publishing Value
IJBT prioritizes blood safety, clinical relevance, and transparent reporting for transfusion medicine research.
Safety Focus
We highlight donor screening, hemovigilance, and transfusion reaction reporting to protect patients.
Clinical Relevance
Research is evaluated for real world impact on transfusion practice and patient outcomes.
Open Access Reach
Articles are freely available to blood centers, hospitals, and clinicians worldwide.
Ethics Alignment
Policies emphasize consent, privacy, and responsible handling of donor and recipient data.
Review Structure
Begin with a brief summary, list major issues, and then note minor revisions. This structure helps authors respond effectively.
Clinical Relevance
Comment on whether results translate to transfusion practice, patient safety, and donor management. Highlight missing clinical context, unclear outcomes, or inadequate follow-up. Suggestions on how authors can link findings to protocols or guidelines are especially valuable to readers. Please note if subgroup analyses require clearer justification and if limitations are fully described for decision making.
Statistical Rigor
Evaluate whether sample size calculations, confidence intervals, and effect sizes are reported appropriately. If complex methods are used, recommend additional explanation or specialist review. Point out inconsistencies between tables, figures, and narrative results to prevent misinterpretation. Clarity on missing data handling is essential. Provide specific corrections where possible and note any overstatement of significance in conclusions.
Ethics and Safety
Check that informed consent, donor eligibility, and adverse event reporting are clearly stated. Flag any ethical ambiguities, including retrospective approvals or unclear data permissions. Safety reporting is critical in transfusion studies, so ensure that risk mitigation is explicit. Suggest revisions when patient or donor privacy might be compromised and highlight the need for data de-identification.
Tone and Constructive Feedback
Use professional, respectful language and focus on how authors can improve the work. Distinguish between essential corrections and optional enhancements. Constructive feedback accelerates revisions and supports the journal's commitment to fair peer review. Avoid personal remarks and provide concrete examples when possible. Timely, clear reviews help authors and readers alike while reducing editorial delays for publication.
Join the Reviewer Network
Register as a reviewer and support high quality transfusion publications.
Email the Editorial OfficeView Reviewer BenefitsEmail: [email protected]
