What does the JMIR Review Form look like? – JMIR Publications

Reviewers must use the Review Form to submit their feedback.

Below you can view a screenshot of the peer-review form after the reviewer has accepted the review request (Basic Elements of the JMIR Peer Review Form). JMIR recently revised its peer-review form, which will be updated continually.

To Access the Review Form

Nominated Reviewers will find a link to the peer-review form in the first line of the review request email (and all reminders).
Reviewers do not have to log in to complete a review. The link contains a secret key, thus it does not require a login. Therefore, the email / URL should not be shared with third parties. See also I was asked to review but cannot login.

Peer Review Guidelines and Resources

JMIR Publications adheres to the guidelines set out by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and expects reviewers to be familiar with these peer reviewing guidelines and follow them to avoid any likelihood of reviewer misconduct.

Reviewers should avoid suggesting the citation of their own work. This practice can be construed as reviewer misconduct in scholarly publishing. While we welcome participation, reviewers should refrain from such recommendations when reviewing a JMIR manuscript.

If you have never done a peer-review before, we recommend consulting some resources on the Internet on that topic, e.g.

(for reviewers) How to write a high-quality peer review
Ten tips for a truly terrible peer review (Elsevier)

Completing the Review Form

The most important fields for the reviewer (other than the narrative review for the author and editor) are:

Overall Decision: indicate what level of revision will be required to achieve that impact on a scale from A to E (see below).
Priority: Rate the priority (importance) of the paper in terms of the projected impact

Reviewers can also suggest other reviewers and can suggest a transfer to other JMIR journals if the paper seems, in principle, publishable but is perhaps out of scope or too weak for the target journal (see What does "Suggest Transfer" [to another JMIR journal] on the review form mean?).

All reviewer comments are recommendations only. The final decision rests with the editor. Editors are by no means obligated to get final approval from all reviewers. It is a common situation that different reviewers have different views on a paper, in which case the final decision rests with the editor.

Reviewers will be invited to re-review the revision unless they rate the paper A or B or unless they indicate that they are not available or unwilling to re-review the paper.

Possible reviewer recommendations:

A-accept (almost never after the first review round)
B-minor revisions required (no further formal external peer-review round required, reviewer will not see the revision, editor makes decision)
C-revise & re-review (reviewer invited for re-review if revision is submitted)
D-major revisions & re-review* (reviewer invited for re-review if revision is submitted)
E-reject* (reviewer invited for re-review if revision is submitted)

*Reviewers are encouraged to make a suggestion for a journal transfer or comment on whether, for example, the paper can be converted to a formative evaluation or protocol paper, e.g., for JMIR Research Protocols