Reviewer Guidelines
Guidance for reviewers evaluating amino acid manuscripts with rigor and fairness.
Glycine
Simplest amino acidLeucine
Branched-chain essentialTryptophan
Aromatic precursorCysteine
Disulfide bondsKey Expectations
Evidence Focus
Evaluate study design, exposure measurement, and statistical rigor.
Constructive Tone
Provide actionable feedback that helps authors improve clarity and methodology.
Timeliness
Accept reviews only when you can meet deadlines.
Ethics Checks
Confirm IRB approvals, consent statements, and conflict disclosures.
Data Transparency
Encourage data availability statements and repository use.
Clinical Impact
Assess how findings inform amino acid therapeutics or nutrition guidance.
Reviewer Impact
Constructive reviews strengthen manuscripts and improve evidence quality.
Timely Feedback
Accept reviews only when deadlines are feasible and communicate delays early.
Scope Fit
Confirm the manuscript aligns with your expertise before accepting review.
Constructive Feedback
Provide clear recommendations that improve scientific clarity and reporting.
Additional Notes
Clear documentation of methods, datasets, and limitations improves reproducibility and reader trust.
Quality Checks
Ensure nomenclature, units, and abbreviations follow standard biochemical conventions.
Visibility Support
Structured abstracts and precise keywords improve indexing performance across discovery services.
Evidence Linked Review
Anchor major concerns to explicit data, methods, and interpretation points. Specific feedback is more actionable for authors and more valuable for editorial decisions.
Professional Report Quality
Separate major and minor comments, maintain respectful tone, and provide clear recommendation logic for consistent review outcomes.
Publication Positioning
High performing manuscripts do more than report findings. They define scientific context, explain practical relevance, and communicate methodological limits clearly. For amino acid research, this positioning helps readers translate biochemical observations into hypotheses, intervention design, and evidence based decision pathways. Clear positioning also improves indexing relevance and long term citation discoverability across interdisciplinary audiences.
Operational Reliability
Editorial efficiency depends on complete files, transparent declarations, and timely author responses during review and revision cycles. Teams that maintain structured communication and compliance discipline typically publish faster and with fewer technical queries. This reliability protects publication timelines, supports stronger production quality, and improves downstream confidence in the final scholarly record.
Specific evidence linked comments are the strongest marker of review quality.
Publication quality is strongest when methodological clarity, transparent data statements, and concise interpretation are aligned in a single narrative. This alignment improves reviewer confidence, reduces avoidable revision cycles, and supports long term discoverability across biochemistry, nutrition, and translational research audiences.
Join The Reviewer Pool
Email [email protected] if you are interested in reviewing for IJAA. Focus on methodological rigor and biological relevance.
