JIG shares guidance updates on methods reporting, transparency expectations, and policy changes relevant to immunology and geriatrics manuscripts.

Editors can request additional support for conflict-heavy or technically ambiguous submissions.

JIG editorial resources are structured to support consistent manuscript evaluation across heterogeneous study designs. Editors should use policy references, decision templates, and reporting checklists to keep assessments transparent, reproducible, and aligned with journal standards.

Reviewer selection tools should be used strategically to balance methodological expertise, topical relevance, and response reliability. A well-matched reviewer panel improves feedback quality and reduces contradictory recommendations that slow editorial adjudication.

Resource materials are updated as publishing standards evolve. Editors should check current guidance regularly and contact [email protected] when additional support or clarification is needed.

Using standardized decision templates helps editors communicate expectations consistently and reduces ambiguity for authors during revision. Template-driven clarity improves manuscript turnaround and makes second-round decisions more efficient for both editors and reviewers.

Editors are encouraged to document recurring manuscript quality issues and share them with the office for training updates. Continuous feedback loops improve resource relevance and strengthen quality control across the full editorial network.

Editorial and peer-review roles deliver the greatest value when expertise, communication quality, and response reliability are all strong. Contributors should keep profiles current, provide evidence-based recommendations, and frame feedback in ways that support actionable revision decisions. Consistent service quality improves turnaround times and strengthens trust across authors, editors, and reviewers. JIG uses this collaborative standard to maintain high publication quality in a field where methodological precision and clinical interpretation both matter. Professionals who engage with discipline and clarity not only improve journal outcomes, but also build durable reputation value and long-term leadership opportunities in the research community.