Guidelines to Reviewers

Ethical Considerations
Any author whose manuscript is associated with a study on humans must supply evidence that the appropriate Ethics Committee was satisfied and approved the study. The study itself must provide information in detail on how  consent was sought and received from the study subjects of their caregivers in the case of children.


 The review process involves sending papers to at least two experts for review. Thereafter, any potentially acceptable paper may also be sent to our statistical adviser.

 The manuscript is a confidential document. Please do not discuss this document with anybody else. Any communication with the author of the manuscript must be done through the Journal Editorial office.

 The referee provides advice to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision, together with members of a well selected panel and the newly constituted Oversight Editorial Board. We will normally pass on your comments (anonymously, of course) to the author.

 As a practice, the author and the reviewer are not known to each other unless otherwise requested by either party. In any case, such disclosure and communication is facilitated by the Editor-in-Chief of AJFAND.

 Even if we do not accept a paper, we would like to pass on constructive comments that might help the author to improve the paper, or in preparing a fresh paper. For this reason, please give detailed comments (with references, where appropriate) that will help the Editor-in-Chief to make a decision on the paper and the authors to improve it. Send detailed comments separately and make your recommendations and any confidential comments to the Editor-in-Chief on a covering letter, by electronic means. Corrections can also be made on the actual text itself, and highlighted for the benefit of the author and the editor.

 The broad aspects that we would like comments on include:

  • The focus must be research and development linkages; is this the case here?
  • (truly original or known to you through foreign or specialist literature) Originality is our major criterion for case reports
  • Scientific reliability
  • Overall design of the study
  • The research undertaken-adequately described and the conditions defined
  • Adequately described?
  • o Appropriate
  • Relevant to problem posed?
  • Credible
  • Well presented (including use of tables and figures)?
  • NEW: Starting 2017, Results and Discussion section are combined
Interpretation and conclusions:
  • Warranted by the data?
  • Reasonable speculation?
  • Is the message clear?
  • NEW: Starting 2017, Conclusions and Recommendations are combined
  • Up to date and relevant?
  • Has the most current literature been used?
  • Any glaring omissions?
  • As per AJFAND requirements?
Importance of the work:
  • Suitability for AJFAND and overall recommendation
  • Appropriate for general readership or more appropriate for a special journal?
  • If not acceptable, how can the paper be improved?
Other points:
  • Ethical aspects
  • Need for statistical assessment
  • Presentation (including writing style)
  • NEW: Use only 3 significant figures (i.e. 58.4 - 59.5%)


 Editorial address to which manuscripts should be sent:

The Editor-in-Chief, AJFAND


Back to Top