Reviewer Guidelines for COPPHA PublishNow
At COPPHA PublishNow, we value openness and inclusivity in the publication and peer review process of public health research. We are committed to involving active public health researchers and professionals at the forefront of our peer review process to uphold research integrity and promote credible, high-quality public health evidence through a transparent, community-driven model.
This guide is designed to help reviewers provide constructive, actionable, and article-appropriate feedback across the different types of submissions we accept, including scientific articles, editorials, reports, policy documents, and presentations.
Once you accept an invitation to review a submission, you will have access to the COPPHA Peer Review Proforma, a structured review form designed to guide your review based on the specific type of submission you are assigned to review. The proforma ensures consistency while allowing flexibility to tailor your feedback to the format and content of each submission.
Your role as a reviewer is critical in shaping rigorous and impactful public health knowledge. Thank you for contributing to this collaborative and transparent review process.
General Principles for All Reviews
- Be transparent: Declare any potential conflicts of interest (COI). Learn more about COI.
- Be respectful: Avoid harsh or dismissive language.
- Be specific: Reference sections or data (e.g., "Table 2 lacks clarity on...").
- Be constructive: Frame suggestions positively and helpfully (e.g., "Consider adding..." instead of "This is missing").
- Be thorough: Review each aspect of the submission.
- Be timely: Submit your review within the requested timeframe or ask for an extension if needed.
- Align with public health: Consider the submission’s potential to inform practice, policy, or equity.
- Anonymity: Choose to sign your review or remain anonymous.
Scientific Articles (Original Research)
When reviewing scientific articles, focus on the structure and clarity of each section. Check if the article follows a standard format, including Abstract, Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions.
Evaluate whether the Abstract clearly summarizes the key components of the study. In the Background section, check if the literature review is comprehensive and if the research question is clearly stated.
For the Methods section, assess whether the procedures are described in sufficient detail to enable replication, including specific tools, conditions, and protocols used. Verify that the chosen methods are appropriate for the research question and supported by established standards.
In the Results section, check that the findings are presented clearly, using appropriate tables, figures, or text. Confirm that the results directly correspond to the methods described and address the research questions or hypotheses.
The Discussion should interpret the results in relation to the research objectives, comparing them with prior studies and explaining their significance. Check that it discusses the study's limitations and avoids making unsupported claims.
Transparency is key — check the data availability statement and ensure the references are relevant, credible, and properly cited.
When giving final feedback, keep it constructive and helpful.
Proforma Tips:
- Q6 (Abstract): Ensure it covers Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclusions in 200-300 words.
- Q7 (Introduction): Check relevance of literature and clarity of hypothesis.
- Q8 (Methods): Confirm clear methodology and ethical statements.
- Q9 (Results): Ensure clarity of tables/figures; address research question.
- Q10 (Discussion): Ensure conclusions are supported; limitations discussed.
- Q11 (Transparency): Verify data/code availability.
- Q12 (References): Ensure they are current and credible.
- Q15 (Final Comments): Keep feedback specific and actionable.
Editorials
When reviewing an editorial, focus on the clarity of the argument. Ensure that the viewpoint or insight presented is clear and compelling, with a well-structured and easily understandable argument.
Evaluate whether the editorial addresses a relevant and pressing issue in public health. Assess whether the argument is supported by appropriate references or logical reasoning.
Proforma Tips:
- Q4 (Structure): Ensure a clear opening, body, and call to action.
- Q5 (Content): Verify the argument is focused and well-supported.
- Q12 (References): Ensure citations are credible and current.
- Q13 (Language): Ensure writing is clear and accessible.
- Q15 (Final Comments): Provide constructive revisions for stronger impact.
Policy Documents
When reviewing a policy document, ensure that the purpose and recommendations are clear, evidence-based, and contextually appropriate.
Evaluate the structure and logical flow, checking for appropriate use of headings, summaries, and credible references.
Proforma Tips:
- Q4 (Structure): Ensure problem, evidence, and recommendations are logically presented.
- Q5 (Content): Verify recommendations are specific and based on strong evidence.
- Q12 (References): Ensure authoritative sources (e.g., UN, WHO).
- Q13 (Language): Check for clear and precise writing.
- Q15 (Final Comments): Highlight feasibility gaps or missing evidence.
Reports (Technical or Field Reports)
When reviewing a report, check that objectives and methods are clearly defined and sufficiently detailed.
Assess if findings are clearly presented and conclusions are logically derived from data.
Proforma Tips:
- Q4 (Structure): Verify logical sectioning (Summary, Intro, Methods, Findings, etc.).
- Q5 (Content): Ensure data supports claims.
- Q12 (References): Check source credibility.
- Q13 (Language): Suggest clarity improvements.
- Q15 (Final Comments): Provide actionable feedback for improvements.
Presentations (e.g., Slide Decks, Posters)
When reviewing a presentation, focus on clarity, logical flow, and effective visual communication.
Evaluate if visuals complement key messages and assess overall accessibility and impact.
Proforma Tips:
- Q4 (Structure): Ensure logical flow of problem → evidence → call to action.
- Q5 (Content): Verify that visuals enhance rather than overload slides.
- Q12 (References): Ensure sources are credible and cited clearly.
- Q13 (Language): Simplify language for readability.
- Q15 (Final Comments): Suggest focused edits for a cleaner presentation.