Reviewer Guidelines

What reviewers assess

• Originality and contribution to Alzheimer’s and dementia research.
• Methodological rigor and statistical soundness.
• Ethics compliance, consent statements and data transparency.
• Clarity of presentation and structure.
• Clinical relevance of the findings.

Reviews are objective and free from personal bias, and they evaluate the work against the journal’s scope and standards. Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.

Structure and recommendation

Give specific, actionable feedback and distinguish major concerns from minor edits. Organizing comments into major issues, minor issues and optional suggestions helps editors and authors respond. Highlight strengths so that authors know what is working well, and focus on the strength of the evidence and the clarity of the methods rather than stylistic preference.

Select the recommendation that best matches the assessment (accept, minor revision, major revision or reject) and give a concise justification. For revised manuscripts, focus on whether the major concerns have been addressed.

Statistical review looks at whether the methods suit the design, whether results are reported in sufficient detail, and whether missing data, sample size justification or unsupported conclusions need attention.

Use of AI tools

Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured.