Reviewer Guideline

It is impossible to imagine scientific progress without peer review. It is one of the crucial elements of ensuring research integrity and validity of the knowledge. We are developing different models to encourage peer review participation via recognition of peer reviews by publishing the reviews and providing a 10% discount on the APC for each review (see APC). In the future, we might be able to provide a peer review fee (we will inform you about this possibility in due time). 

Before starting the review process, we invite you to read the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. 

Principles of Open Peer Review at MHO

Mental Health Open follows an open peer review model, which includes:

  • Transparency: Reviewer names and full reports are published with the article.

  • Accountability: Reviewers stand by their comments, contributing to the integrity of the scientific discourse.

  • Constructive Dialogue: Reviewers may engage in ongoing open discussion with authors and fellow reviewers.

Before agreeing to review, ensure that you are comfortable participating in an open review process.

Becoming a Reviewer

Reviewers are selected based on expertise and prior research contributions. To qualify:

  • Ensure your professional profile (e.g., ORCID) is up to date.

  • Accept review invitations only if you have the required expertise.

  • Declare any competing interests — personal, financial, professional, or institutional — before agreeing to review.

Do not accept to review:

  • If you have collaborated with the authors in the past 3 years.

  • If you are at the same institution as the authors.

  • If you have any intention of copying or using the manuscript content improperly.

Ethical Responsibilities During Review

Confidentiality

  • Do not share or discuss the manuscript with others without editorial permission.

  • Do not use unpublished data for your own advantage.

Professional Conduct

  • Be objective, respectful, and constructive.

  • Avoid personal, defamatory, or unsubstantiated criticisms.

Review Content Integrity

  • Do not suggest citations to your own work unless they are highly relevant.

  • Be clear about what you evaluated. If you reviewed only specific sections (e.g., methodology), mention this.

Conducting the Review

Your report should:

  • Address the importance, soundness, and clarity of the manuscript.

  • Evaluate whether conclusions are justified by the data.

  • Identify methodological flaws, ethical concerns, or incomplete reporting.

  • Offer suggestions for improvement, not extensive rewriting.

Use the platform-provided form and structure. Submit your review:

  • Within the agreed timeframe (usually 10–14 days).

  • In a professional and readable format (short paragraphs, bullet points are acceptable).

After Submission of Review

  • You may be invited to review a revised version. Please, remain available for follow-up.

  • If your opinion changes (e.g., you discover a conflict of interest or error), inform the editors promptly.

  • Do not discuss the manuscript outside the review process, even after publication, unless you have the author's and editor's permission.

Public Review and Engagement

Once your review is published:

  • You are encouraged to stand by your critique as part of the scholarly record.

  • You may respond to author rebuttals or engage in moderated discussion if appropriate.

  • Your review will carry a DOI and be cited as a scholarly contribution (Open Research Europe model).

Training and Support

We support peer reviewer development:

  • First-time reviewers are encouraged to take free online training (e.g., Publons Academy or Sense about Science).

  • Mentorship: Early-career reviewers may co-review with a mentor, but this must be disclosed to the editor.

  • Feedback: Editorial staff may provide feedback on your review for improvement purposes.

Recognition and Acknowledgement

At Mental Health Open, we:

  • Provide open reviewer recognition through published reviews.

  • Offer optional certificates of contribution upon request.

  • Encourage listing your MHO reviews on academic profiles (e.g., ORCID, Publons).

Contact and Support

For reviewer queries, support, or ethical concerns, contact: editor@mentalhealthopen.eu