© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Edited By: Andrew Moore
Impact Factor: 5.423
ISI Journal Citation Reports © Ranking: 2012: 9/83 (Biology); 49/290 (Biochemistry & Molecular Biology)
Online ISSN: 1521-1878
If you are reviewing for BioEssays...
BioEssays operates a closed peer review procedure: reviewers must observe absolute confidentiality as soon as the manuscript is in their hands, and follow ethical codes of conduct that ensure that the manuscript's contents are not misappropriated – by anyone – for potential publication elsewhere, or for unfair scientific advantage. That confidentiality also extends to the knowledge that a particular reviewer has agreed to review a particular manuscript, and to the reviewer report itself. Reviewers must not reveal the contents of their review to anyone outside BioEssays’ Editorial, particularly not to other reviewers of the same manuscript.
In your review report, please discuss the originality, accuracy and completeness of the work. Has relevant literature been cited, for example? Comment on positive as well as negative aspects of the manuscript. State your criticisms clearly whilst keeping your language neutral and to the point: strongly worded attacks detract from the scientific content of a report, and legitimate criticisms might be dismissed as unbalanced. Further details of what is expected of authors for particular rubrics is to be found in the BioEssays rubric guide. Please refer to that document when reviewing a manuscript for us.
BioEssays has a broad readership, so we ask authors to write in a style accessible to biologists who are non-specialists in their particular field. Authors are advised to concentrate on important PRINCPLES in their body text, and not to mix so much accompanying detail with the principles as to confuse the important messages. Authors may place necessary detail (for more specialist readers) in tables or information boxes. Should you have comments or advice on that aspect of the manuscript, please communicate it in your reviewer report.
BioEssays trusts that a reviewer named in the request to review will, personally, review the manuscript her/himself. However, if you are a group leader, and one of your post-docs contributes to, or performs, the review, please make Editorial aware of that fact, and please check the report yourself before it is submitted.
On the reviewer report page in Manuscript Central, there is a space for "Confidential Comments to Editor" and a space for "Comments to the Author". Please be sure to put your comments to the author in the appropriate space. Please, in the spirit of open and constructive criticism, try to put as much as possible into the comments for the author, and as little as possible into the confidential comments to the Editor.