For Reviewers

The East African Medical Journal (EAMJ) relies on the expertise and commitment of its reviewers to maintain the scientific quality, credibility, and integrity of the journal. Peer reviewers play a critical role in ensuring that published research is accurate, ethical, relevant, and of high scholarly value. We are grateful for the time and effort contributed by our reviewers.

Role of the Reviewer

Reviewers are expected to provide independent, constructive, and unbiased evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Reviews should assist editors in making informed editorial decisions and help authors improve the quality, clarity, and scientific rigor of their work.

Specifically, reviewers are asked to:

  • Assess the scientific validity, originality, and relevance of the manuscript.

  • Evaluate the appropriateness of the study design, methodology, data analysis, and interpretation of results.

  • Comment on the clarity, structure, and organization of the manuscript.

  • Identify ethical concerns, including issues related to patient consent, ethical approval, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data fabrication.

  • Provide constructive feedback and clear recommendations to authors and editors.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to EAMJ are confidential documents. Reviewers must:

  • Treat all materials received for review as strictly confidential.

  • Not share, discuss, or distribute the manuscript or its contents with others without explicit permission from the editor.

  • Not use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline to review any manuscript in which they have a potential conflict of interest. Conflicts may be personal, professional, financial, institutional, or intellectual in nature. If any conflict is identified after accepting the review, reviewers should immediately inform the handling editor.

Objectivity and Ethical Conduct

Reviews should be conducted objectively and respectfully. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should:

  • Base their evaluations solely on scientific merit.

  • Clearly distinguish between major and minor concerns.

  • Support critiques with clear reasoning and, where appropriate, references.

  • Alert the editor to any suspected misconduct or ethical issues.

Timeliness

EAMJ values timely peer review. Reviewers are encouraged to:

  • Accept review invitations only when they are able to complete the review within the agreed timeframe.

  • Inform the editor promptly if delays are anticipated.

  • Decline review invitations as soon as possible if unable to review, and where appropriate, suggest alternative qualified reviewers.

Review Recommendations

Reviewers are typically asked to provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept without revision

  • Accept with minor revisions

  • Major revision required

  • Reject

These recommendations should be supported by detailed comments that justify the decision and guide both editors and authors.

Anonymity

EAMJ operates a double-blind peer-review process, where reviewer identities are protected unless a reviewer explicitly chooses to disclose their name. Reviewers should ensure that their comments do not inadvertently reveal their identity.

Recognition of Reviewers

EAMJ recognizes the essential contribution of its reviewers and may acknowledge reviewers annually or provide certificates of review upon request, in line with journal policy.

Contact Information

For questions regarding the review process, ethical concerns, or technical issues, reviewers are encouraged to contact the EAMJ editorial office through the journal’s official communication channels.