ISSN 2407-2230 | E-ISSN 1907-3062 | Universa Medicina content is searchable on DOAJ, Google Scholar, and OAI

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Guidelines


Thank you for agreeing to serve as a reviewer for Universa Medicina. The journal publishes new research findings on a wide variety of topics of importance to biomedical science and clinical practice. A detailed checklist is provided to guide the review process. Please complete all sections of this and return it with a separately detailed critique of the manuscript.

These instructions are provided to assist you in the review process. You have been invited to serve as a reviewer because of your expertise in the research topic of the submitted article. The editors rely on your expert assessment to ensure that the journal publishes high quality research of significant scientific interest. Your review also assists the authors in improving the presentation of their research. You may make recommendations regarding revision or additional data that must be included before the article is acceptable for publication. If you recommend that the article be rejected, please give specific reasons for your decision. The final decision concerning acceptability of a manuscript is the responsibility of the Editor. Finally, you are responsible for alerting the editors to any ethical concerns or potential inadequacies in the disclosure of authors’ competing interests.


Manuscripts sent for review are privileged communications and must remain strictly confidential at all times. Referees must not copy, share or disclose the content of manuscripts to any other person except with the permission of the Editor. Referees must not use knowledge of the work, before its publication, to further their own interests. When you have completed and submitted your review, please delete or destroy all copies of downloaded or printed manuscript files, as these are the property of the submitting authors.

Conflict of Interest

Referees must disclose to the Editor any conflicts of interest or competing financial interests that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and should disqualify themselves if they believe this to be appropriate. You are not precluded from reviewing the manuscript because you have previously reviewed a version for another journal. However, in the Confidential Comments to the Editor, please note this and let us know whether the authors have improved the manuscript in response to your review elsewhere.


Referees shall remain anonymous, unless both the referee and the Editor agree otherwise.


Checklist for Case Report

Give your main impressions of the article, including whether it is novel and interesting.

Point out any journal-specific points – does it adhere to the journal’s standards?

If you suspect plagiarism, fraud or have other ethical concerns, raise your suspicions with the editor, providing as much detail as possible.

Give specific comments and suggestions, including Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, statistical errors, Results, Discussion, Conclusion and References.