Reviewer Resources for JHD
Use practical tools and guidance to deliver clear, consistent hereditary disease reviews.
Tools for Effective Review Writing
JHD provides structured materials that improve review quality and speed.
Review Templates
Structured outlines for major and minor comment sections.
Scoring Prompts
Guidance for methodological quality and evidence strength assessment.
Ethics Checklist
Quick checks for consent, conflicts, and data transparency.
Quick Reference
Examples of actionable reviewer language and decision rationale.
These tools help reviewers deliver balanced, useful feedback and reduce ambiguity in editorial decision-making.
Training and Clarification Pathways
Reviewers can request guidance when handling complex manuscripts.
JHD offers periodic updates on reporting expectations and methodological trends relevant to hereditary disease studies. Reviewers can contact the editorial office for clarification on scope, ethics concerns, or unusual analytic designs.
Optional training sessions are designed to improve consistency across reviewers and support constructive, evidence-based recommendations.
Resources That Improve Review Quality
JHD provides practical templates and quality prompts for reviewers.
Reviewer resources include structured comment templates, consistency prompts for statistical and ethics checks, and examples of high-quality actionable feedback. These tools reduce ambiguity and help editors synthesize recommendations faster.
For manuscripts with unusual hereditary evidence models, reviewers may request clarification from the editorial office without breaking confidentiality protocols.
Staying Current With Review Standards
Periodic updates align reviewers with evolving expectations in genetics publishing.
Guideline Updates
Track new reporting standards and methodological best practices.
Template Refresh
Use current forms that reflect policy and editorial requirement changes.
Case Learning
Study model examples for clear and constructive technical feedback.
Using Templates for Faster, Better Feedback
Structured templates reduce review variability and improve clarity.
Template-driven reviews help ensure major and minor comments are separated, evidence gaps are explicit, and actionable revision guidance is provided consistently.
This improves editorial synthesis and author response quality.
Use Structured Major and Minor Sections
Structured comments improve editorial synthesis.
Separating major from minor issues helps authors prioritize revisions and supports faster, clearer editorial decisions.
Prioritize Major Issues First
Ordered feedback accelerates revision quality.
List high-impact concerns before minor edits to improve author response focus.
Access JHD Reviewer Tools
Use updated resources to strengthen review quality and editorial consistency.
For support: [email protected]
