Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewers are essential to maintaining scientific quality and credibility in cytokine research.
These guidelines support fair, timely, and constructive evaluations.
Why Researchers Trust Us
Fast Publication
Average 4 weeks to first decision, 3 weeks to publication after acceptance
Expert Review
35+ editorial board members specializing in cytokine biology and immunology
Global Reach
Research disseminated to immunology professionals in 45+ countries immediately
Rigorous Standards
Double-blind peer review ensuring highest scientific quality and reproducibility
Journal at a Glance
International Journal of Cytokine publishes research that advances understanding of immune signaling, inflammation, and translational immunology. The journal emphasizes rigorous methodology, clear reporting, and clinical relevance to support evidence based care.
Our publishing model combines rapid editorial triage with expert peer review so that cytokine research can move from discovery to application efficiently.
- Peer reviewed open access journal focused on cytokine science.
- Double blind peer review and structured editorial decisions.
- DOI assignment and metadata delivery for discoverability.
- Global readership across immunology and clinical communities.
Quality and Transparency Commitment
Quality assurance is embedded throughout the IJCY workflow. Editorial screening, ethical checks, and reviewer guidance ensure that published results are credible, reproducible, and clinically meaningful.
Authors receive clear decision letters and detailed revision guidance, helping them improve manuscripts and communicate findings with precision.
- Structured reviewer criteria and decision templates.
- Integrity checks for originality and data clarity.
- Transparent timelines and consistent communication.
Core Review Criteria
- Originality and contribution to cytokine science.
- Sound methodology and appropriate statistics.
- Clear reporting of results and limitations.
- Ethical compliance and data integrity.
Constructive Feedback
Reviews should be specific, respectful, and focused on improving the manuscript. Highlight strengths and provide clear recommendations for revision.
Numbered comments and references to figures or tables help authors respond efficiently.
Structuring Your Review
A clear structure helps editors and authors interpret feedback. Consider summarizing the manuscript, listing major concerns, and then providing minor edits.
- Start with a brief overall summary.
- Identify major issues affecting validity.
- Provide minor edits for clarity and style.
Confidentiality and Conflicts
Manuscripts are confidential and should not be shared. Report any conflicts of interest before accepting a review invitation.
If concerns arise during review, notify the editor promptly.
Ethical Considerations
Reviewers should flag potential ethical concerns such as missing approvals, unclear consent statements, or data inconsistencies.
Editors will guide next steps if ethical issues are identified.
Review Timeline
Reviewers are asked to return reports within the requested timeframe. If delays occur, inform the editor so timelines can be adjusted.
Reviewer Support
Review Guidance
Contact the editorial office for review templates or reporting standards.
[email protected]
