Instructions for Reviewers

World Nutrition is a peer‑reviewed journal of the World Public Health Nutrition Association (WPHNA). Peer reviewers play a central role in maintaining the scientific quality, ethical integrity, and relevance of the journal. These instructions provide comprehensive guidance for reviewers invited to assess manuscripts submitted to World Nutrition.

  1. Role of the Reviewer

Reviewers are expected to provide independent, objective, and constructive assessments of manuscripts within their areas of expertise. Reviews should help editors reach fair decisions and assist authors in improving the quality, clarity, and rigor of their work.

Reviewers act as advisors to the editors and do not make final publication decisions.

  1. Type of Peer Review

World Nutrition operates a double‑blind peer review system:

  • Reviewers do not know the identities of authors
  • Authors do not know the identities of reviewers

Reviewers should avoid any actions that might compromise anonymity.

  1. Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are strictly confidential.

Reviewers must:

  • Not share manuscripts or related materials with others
  • Not discuss the manuscript outside the review process
  • Not use any unpublished information for personal or professional advantage
  • Not upload manuscripts or content into generative AI tools or external platforms

If expert advice is needed, reviewers must first obtain permission from the editor.

  1. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review, including:

  • Personal or professional relationships with the authors
  • Financial or institutional interests related to the manuscript
  • Direct competition or intellectual rivalry

If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline the invitation.

  1. Accepting or Declining a Review Invitation

When invited to review, reviewers should consider:

  • Relevance of the manuscript to their expertise
  • Ability to provide a review within the requested timeframe
  • Absence of conflicts of interest

If declining, reviewers are encouraged to suggest alternative qualified reviewers, where possible.

  1. Review Timeline
  • Reviewers are typically asked to complete reviews within 2–4 weeks
  • Extensions may be requested from the handling editor if needed
  • Timely reviews are essential to maintaining an efficient editorial process
  1. Scope of Review

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the journal’s aims and scope, which emphasise:

  • Public health and community nutrition
  • Equity, justice, sustainability, and human rights
  • Policy relevance and real‑world implications

Animal studies are not accepted by the journal; manuscripts must relate directly to human populations, systems, or policies.

  1. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to comment on the following aspects, as applicable:

  1. Originality and Contribution
  • Novelty of the research question or perspective
  • Contribution to existing knowledge or practice
  • Relevance to public health nutrition
  1. Scientific and Methodological Quality
  • Appropriateness of study design and methods
  • Adequacy of sample size and analysis
  • Transparency and reproducibility
  • Appropriate use of reporting standards (e.g. CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE)
  1. Ethical Considerations
  • Evidence of ethical approval for studies involving humans
  • Informed consent procedures
  • Protection of participants and vulnerable populations
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest and funding
  1. Data and Transparency
  • Clarity and completeness of data reporting
  • Consistency between results and conclusions
  • Adequacy of data availability statements
  1. Presentation and Clarity
  • Logical structure and coherence
  • Clarity of language and arguments
  • Appropriate use of tables and figures
  1. Interpretation and Implications
  • Whether conclusions are supported by data
  • Consideration of limitations
  • Relevance for policy, practice, or future research
  1. Reviewer Comments

Reviewers should provide:

Comments to Authors

  • Constructive, respectful, and specific feedback
  • Suggestions for improvement rather than only criticism
  • Clear identification of major and minor issues

Confidential Comments to Editors

  • Overall assessment of the manuscript
  • Ethical concerns or integrity issues
  • Recommendation regarding publication
  1. Editorial Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of the following:

  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

Final decisions are made by the editors, taking all reviews into account.

  1. Use of Generative AI by Reviewers

The use of artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted tools (e.g., large language models or automated text generators) to generate, draft, or substantially compose peer review reports is strictly prohibited.

Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to:

  • Analyse or summarise manuscripts
  • Generate review reports
  • Translate or rewrite manuscript content

This is to protect confidentiality and intellectual property.

  1. Ethical Concerns and Misconduct

If reviewers suspect:

  • Plagiarism
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Duplicate publication
  • Undisclosed AI use
  • Ethical violations involving human participants

They should report concerns confidentially to the editor, providing as much detail as possible.

  1. Recognition of Reviewers

World Nutrition values the voluntary contribution of reviewers. While reviews are anonymous, the journal may:

  • Provide confirmation letters upon request
  • Publicly acknowledge reviewers annually (without linking names to specific manuscripts)
  • Exceptional reviewers may also be considered for inclusion on the Editorial Board, with a professional bio profile displayed on the journal website.
  1. Reviewer Conduct

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Be objective and unbiased
  • Avoid discriminatory or derogatory language
  • Respect diversity of perspectives and contexts
  • Support equity, inclusion, and global representation in science

 

Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, tables, figures, supplementary materials, or any portion thereof to AI platforms or third-party tools. Manuscripts under review are confidential documents, and uploading them to AI systems constitutes a breach of confidentiality. Such use may also result in unpublished material being incorporated into external AI databases, potentially containing inaccuracies or misinterpretations.

  1. Contact and Support

For questions regarding a review assignment, reviewers may contact the editorial office:

Email: editor@worldnutritionjournal.org

By agreeing to review for World Nutrition, reviewers confirm that they have read, understood, and agreed to abide by these instructions.