Reviewer Instructions

Peer Review

Peer review is the critical evaluation of a scholarly work by independent experts in the same field. It is used to assess the quality, validity, originality, and scientific significance of a manuscript before publication. Independent researchers with relevant expertise evaluate submitted manuscripts to help editors decide whether a manuscript is suitable for publication in Stem Cells and Cellular Therapy International.

How the Peer Review Process Works

When a manuscript is submitted, it first undergoes an initial assessment by the editorial office to ensure it meets the journal submission requirements and scope. Manuscripts that pass this screening are sent for peer review. Qualified reviewers with relevant subject expertise are invited to evaluate the manuscript and provide detailed and constructive feedback. This process helps improve the scientific quality of the research and ensures its suitability for publication.

Double Blind Peer Review

The journal follows a double blind peer review process. The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This ensures that manuscripts are evaluated solely on scientific merit and free from personal or institutional bias.

Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewers should accept review invitations only if the manuscript falls within their area of expertise and they can complete the review within the specified time. A thorough review generally requires four to six hours. Any potential conflicts of interest whether personal professional or financial must be disclosed to the editor before accepting the review.

Peer Review Checklist

Reviewers are requested to evaluate whether the title reflects the manuscript content the abstract accurately summarizes the study the keywords are relevant the background and objectives are clearly described the methods are sound and reproducible the results are clearly presented and the discussion and conclusions are supported by the findings. Reviewers should also assess the quality of figures tables references organization significance of the research and ethical compliance.

Detailed Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers should assess whether the manuscript includes all essential sections such as the abstract introduction materials and methods results discussion and references. The introduction should clearly define the research problem and objectives. The methods should be described in sufficient detail to allow replication. The results should be presented clearly without interpretation and the discussion should explain the significance of the findings in relation to existing literature.

Reviewing Specific Aspects

Reviewers are not expected to copyedit manuscripts for language. If language issues significantly affect clarity the editor should be informed. Reviewers should verify that relevant previous research is appropriately cited and report any ethical concerns including suspected plagiarism data fabrication or breaches of human or animal research ethics.

Prioritizing Scientific Merit

Reviewers are encouraged to focus primarily on the scientific quality originality and importance of the research rather than minor spelling grammar or formatting issues. Minor language and formatting corrections will be addressed during the production stage.

Conducting the Review

All reviews must be conducted confidentially. Manuscripts should not be shared with third parties and reviewers must not attempt to contact the authors directly. Reviewer comments play a significant role in the editor final decision.

Originality and Significance

Reviewers should determine whether the manuscript is original contributes new knowledge and addresses an important research question relevant to the journal readership. Reviewers may consult literature databases such as PubMed Scopus or the Cochrane Library to assess originality.

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

The journal follows the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics COPE. Peer review is conducted in a fair unbiased confidential and timely manner.

Join as a Reviewer

Serving as a reviewer is an important contribution to the scientific community. Researchers with relevant expertise are invited to join the journal reviewer panel by registering through the journal official website.

Submitting the Review Report

Reviewers must submit their evaluation through the journal online submission system. Reports should include constructive comments for the author confidential comments for the editor if necessary and a clear recommendation to accept revise or reject the manuscript.

Artificial Intelligence Guidelines

The use of artificial intelligence tools in peer review must be handled responsibly. AI tools may assist with language clarity but must not compromise confidentiality originality or ethical standards.

Peer Review Workflow

The peer review process includes manuscript submission editorial screening assignment to reviewers completion of peer review editorial decision author notification revision if required and final acceptance and publication.

Post Acceptance

After acceptance manuscripts undergo copyediting typesetting and proofreading. Authors are provided with proofs for final review before publication.

Recognition for Reviewers

Reviewers receive an official acknowledgment from the editorial office for their contribution. Review activity may also be recorded with recognized reviewer credit platforms upon the reviewer request.