AJNR Academy of Reviewers

This initiative provides publicly available resources to any member of the AJNR community who is interested in learning about the review process.

Goals:

• Increase familiarity with the AJNR review process
• Provide peer review training

Resources:

• Example checklist for writing a review
• Explanation of AJNR peer review process
  • View PowerPoint presentation describing the peer review process
  • View flow chart of the peer review process
  • Editor-in-Chief Dr. Max Wintermark explaining the AJNR peer review process
    • Listen to audio only 
    • View video presentation: Part 1 and Part 2
• Seasoned AJNR reviewers' insights and tips on how to perform a review
  • Interview with Dr. Mauricio Castillo
    • Listen to audio only
    • View video presentation: Part 1 and Part 2
• Examples of “good” and “bad” reviews
  • Good example #1: Detailed review containing all necessary information
  • Good example #2: Detailed review containing all necessary information
  • Good example #3: Concise and clear review of the strengths and limitations of the study
  • Good example #4: Detailed review containing all necessary information
  • Bad example #1: Vague review without helpful guidance for the editor
  • Bad example #2: Vague review without helpful guidance for the editor
  • Bad example #3: Short review without helpful guidance for the editor
  • Bad example #4: Short review without helpful guidance for the editor
  • Bad example #5: Harsh review without helpful guidance for the editor
  • Bad example #6: Harsh review without helpful guidance for the editor
• If you would like guidance or feedback on your review, please contact Dr. Max Wintermark and/or the appropriate team of subject editors. Your email should include a PDF of the manuscript, your initial review, and your specific questions.

Additional Resources:

• Resource #1: Example of a step-by-step guide to performing a review