JHOR · ISSN 2372-6601
Guidelines for Editors
Editors provide scholarly oversight, manage independent peer review and protect the integrity of the published record. Decisions must be based on evidence, not author identity, payment or journal roles.
- Core dutyFair scholarly assessment
- ConflictsDisclose and recuse
- ReviewIndependent expertise
- RecordDocument decisions
Editorial workflow
Each stage should leave a clear and auditable rationale.
Assess scope and completeness
Confirm that the central question fits hematology or oncology and that required ethics and disclosure statements are present.
Select independent reviewers
Match subject and methodological expertise, avoid conflicts, and seek additional expertise for complex statistics or specialized methods. Manuscripts proceeding to external review should normally be assigned to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject and methodological expertise.
Evaluate the evidence
Consider design, analysis, reporting, originality, limitations and whether the conclusions follow from the results.
Communicate the decision
Explain the main reasons, distinguish required revisions from optional suggestions and maintain a professional tone.
Handle revisions and record updates
Check responses against the requested work and address corrections, concerns or appeals under the journal's policies.
Decision standards
Research integrity
Check approvals, consent, registration, competing interests, authorship, data availability and potential duplication or manipulation.
Clinical and translational relevance
Assess whether the study's contribution is clearly connected to a hematology or oncology question.
Reporting quality
Use the relevant guideline—such as CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE or ARRIVE—without substituting checklist completion for scientific judgment.
Conflicts, confidentiality and AI
Recusal
An editor must not handle a manuscript when a personal, financial, institutional or close collaborative relationship could affect—or reasonably appear to affect—the decision. An independent editor handles the editor's own submissions.
Confidentiality and double-blind review
Manuscripts, reviewer identities, and editorial correspondence are confidential. Unpublished material must not be used or shared outside the authorized review process. When double-blind review has been requested, editors must ensure that author-identifying information is not shared with reviewers.
Use of AI tools
Editors must not upload confidential manuscript content to an AI system unless the journal has explicitly authorized the use and confidentiality can be assured. Any permitted use must be disclosed to the journal. Editors remain responsible for all reasoning and decisions.
Research-integrity escalation
Editors must promptly report suspected plagiarism, image manipulation, fabricated or falsified data, undisclosed conflicts, or other integrity concerns to the editorial office at [email protected]. Evidence should be preserved and the manuscript kept confidential while the matter is assessed.
Special issues
Guest-edited submissions receive the same scope, conflict, reviewer-independence, and acceptance standards as regular manuscripts.
Joining the editorial team
Editorial appointments are vetted against the journal's needs; they are not automatic registrations.
- Evidence requested
- Current academic CV, ORCID iD, affiliation, subject expertise and relevant publication record.
- Selection
- The editorial office assesses scope fit, experience, conflicts and the balance of expertise required by the board.
- Independence
- An appointment confers no advantage in the review or acceptance of the editor's own work.
- Contact
- Expressions of interest may be sent through the publisher contact page for editorial review.
Contact the editorial office
Send appointment questions or policy concerns through the publisher's contact channel.