Reviewer Guidelines
Thank you for contributing your expertise to the International Journal of Nutrition (IJN). These guidelines help ensure fair, constructive, and timely peer review so high‑quality research reaches the global community.
Scope: IJN welcomes reviews of original research, clinical and laboratory studies, case reports, short communications, methods/how‑tos, and narrative/systematic reviews related to nutrition, dietetics, public health nutrition, food science, metabolism and allied fields.
Your Review Checklist
Scientific Quality
- Clear research question and significance
- Appropriate, reproducible methods and statistics
- Results support conclusions; limitations addressed
- Ethics approvals and participant consent where required
Presentation
- Logical structure and clarity of writing
- Tables/figures are accurate, legible and necessary
- References are current and relevant
- Language is understandable for an international audience
How to Write Constructive Reviews
- Be specific: Point to exact sections/lines and suggest actionable improvements.
- Be balanced: Note strengths first, then major issues, then minor edits.
- Stay professional: Critique the work, not the author.
- Use headings: Summary, Major Comments, Minor Comments, Confidential Notes to Editor (if any).
- Out of scope: Recommend desk‑reject if the manuscript does not fit the journal scope.
Timelines and Workload
Typical review time: 14 days (extensions available on request). If you cannot complete the review, please decline promptly so we can reassign.
- Average manuscript length: 3,000–6,000 words
- Reviews per year (typical): 3–5, flexible
Ethical Responsibilities
- Confidentiality: Do not share manuscript content outside the review.
- Conflict of interest: Decline when personal, financial, or competitive interests exist.
- Objectivity: Evaluate on scientific merit regardless of authors’ identity or affiliation.
- Originality: Report suspected plagiarism, duplication, data fabrication or ethical concerns to the editor.
- Non‑use of information: Do not use any unpublished data in your own research.
Best Practices
File Handling
- Prefer PDFs for review; avoid editing authors’ source files.
- Provide comments in a separate document or the review form.
Communication
- Use courteous language and evidence‑based reasoning.
- Clearly justify recommendations: Accept, Minor/Major Revision, or Reject.
Ready to Review for IJN?
Join our reviewer community and help raise the standard of nutrition research.
Register as Reviewer View Reviewer Benefits
