The Journal of Collegiate Emergency Medical Services (JCEMS) employs a double-blind peer review process for Original Research, Case Reports, Reviews, and any other content the Editors deem requires double-anonymized peer review. The clinical and scientific quality of this publication relies on the rigorous and diligent reviews provided by independent reviewers with subject matter expertise. JCEMS is grateful for all anonymous independent reviewers who dedicated their time and expertise to the collegiate EMS community. Your contribution helps amplify the voices of the collegiate EMS community.
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Respond to an invitation to review a JCEMS manuscript within 3 days, indicating whether the reviewer accepts the invitation.
- Complete assigned reviews within 14 days of the initial invitation. Notify the editors if the review will not be completed within 14 days.
- Thoroughly familiarize themselves with JCEMS submission guidelines as detailed in the JCEMS Editorial Policies & Practices.
- Maintain confidentiality during the review process. Reviewers may not share manuscript details or identify themselves as a reviewer during the review process.
- Provide an unbiased review. If the reviewer believes that they know the identity of the author, or are otherwise unable to provide an unbiased review, it is the responsibility of the reviewer to contact an Editor.
Benefits of Reviewing for JCEMS
- An annual letter of gratitude written on official JCEMS letterhead for their academic record. The letter will note the number of reviews the reviewer conducted in the preceding year.
- Annual acknowledgment of the most active reviewers in the print version of JCEMS, with the permission of the acknowledged reviewers.
- Professional development, the establishment of expertise, the improvement of scholarly reputation, and contributions to the collegiate EMS community.
Peer Review Terms & Conditions
JCEMS is under no obligation to send out a manuscript for peer review, nor to follow the feedback provided by the Reviewers.
Peer Review Feedback & Communication
Editors are responsible for communicating professionally and ensuring Reviewers have access to all required materials to conduct the peer review. Reviewers are encouraged to provide professional, respectful, and actionable feedback. Editors must ensure that all feedback from peer review is constructive, honest, and professional. Any feedback found to be disrespectful, use vulgar language, or make assumptions about the Authors will be omitted from disclosure to the Authors, and may result in the discontinuation of the Reviewer’s relationship with JCEMS.
Conflicts of Interest for Reviewers
JCEMS requests that Reviewers must disclose any relationships or activities that may be a conflict of interest in reviewing the manuscript to the Editors. Purposeful failure to report conflicts of interest will be handled as misconduct.
Confidentiality for Reviewers
Reviewers must also keep manuscripts, review materials, and correspondence with JCEMS confidential. If a Reviewer uses assistance from a student or colleague in the review of a manuscript, the names of the individuals involved in the review must be communicated to the Editors upon return of the manuscript feedback. Reviewers must delete copies of the manuscript after review and cannot appropriate the authors’ ideas. Reviewer comments will not be published without the permission of both the Author(s) and the Reviewer. The anonymity of the Reviewers will always be maintained unless a Reviewer requests otherwise in writing. Editors and Reviewers should not use Artificial Intelligence (AI) to assist in their review and/or editing process. AI may not be confidential; therefore, the manuscript’s confidentiality cannot be assured when using these tools.
Manuscript Review Form for Reviewers
Reviewers who accept an invitation to review a manuscript are expected to submit a Manuscript Review Form and an attached review within 14 days of receiving the invitation, or a pre-determined date in accordance with the handling Editor of the manuscript. If a Reviewer requires additional time, the Editors appreciate advance notice and are willing to work with Reviewers to accommodate their schedule, if feasible.
The Manuscript Review Form can be found here.
