Creating a review report first begins with a thorough evaluation of the manuscript. Editors use this to inform their decision of whether or not to proceed with publication, and authors use your feedback to revise and strengthen their paper. 

Before you begin 

Take a moment to scan through the manuscript and write a paragraph summarizing its contents. This will show the editor your understanding of the material and care in preparing the report. Consider the readability and suitability of the manuscript for the journal’s audience. 

Title, abstract, keywords 

• Titles: Accurate and can catch the reader’s attention 
• Abstracts: Clear, short summary of the full manuscript. Contains enough information to stand alone and be understood by a researcher outside your specialty 
• Keywords: Relevant and can help readers discover the article. Addresses the importance of the research 

Introduction 

• Provides essential background knowledge and context on the topic 
• Effectively demonstrates the importance of the research question 
• References mentioned are current, accurate, and necessary 

Materials and Methods 

• Methods are appropriate, current, and properly cited 
• Show how all data in the results section were obtained 
• Should be clearly described so readers can potentially repeat experiments 
• Study design is not biased in a way that may affect the results and subsequent conclusions 

Results, Figures, and Statistics 

• Results: Should be analysed and interpreted correctly 
• Figures: Presents results clearly and without manipulation. Includes appropriate headings, legends, descriptions and relevant measures of uncertainty 
• Statistical analysis: Statistical tests used were appropriate for the data. Potential sources of bias are also addressed 

Discussion and Conclusion 

• Discussion: Result interpretations address the research question and are put in context with previous research 
• Conclusion: Revisits the research question, addresses the impact of the results, describes potential limitations, and suggests future experiments  

References 

• Showcase the depth of current research and helps bolster the credibility of the results 
• Provide sufficient background to make conclusions about the research presented  
• Contain essential, current studies from a variety of source 

Writing your report 

Once you’ve conducted a detailed evaluation, you’re ready to begin writing your report. The purpose of your report is to recommend whether or not the manuscript gets published and to provide feedback that can help authors improve their manuscript. 

Your report is broken down into two sections:  

Comments for the Editor:  

• Provide your publication recommendation and reasoning 
• Reflect on the overall quality of the paper and the extent of revisions you found necessary
• Describe the impact of the research for the field and the journal

Comments for the Author and Editor: 

• Divide your report into two sections, “major” and “minor” issues 
• Organize your comments using a numbered list 
• Provide feedback using your section-by-section evaluation 

Offer constructive feedback by pointing out strengths and suggesting ways to address weaknesses. Avoid negative wording, personal comments, or overly brief and direct statements to help keep the revision process productive for everyone involved. 

You may be involved in subsequent revision cycles, so make sure to be fair and considerate as you communicate suggestions and negotiate revisions with the author and editor. 

How to get involved 

Want to learn more about evaluating manuscripts and constructing reviewer reports while connecting with researchers all around the world? 

The Springer Nature Reviewer Programme, through our dedicated Reviewing Editor role, aims to help peer reviewers across all disciplines feel better supported, prepared, and rewarded for their contributions. Access training courses, guides, exclusive events, and networking opportunities all designed to enhance your peer reviewer experience. 

Interested in becoming a Reviewing Editor? Apply on our official form today! 

Learn more about the programme, hear from current Reviewing Editors, and explore our benefits on the Springer Nature Reviewer Programme homepage. For more specific questions, please contact reviewer.engagement@springernature.com.  

We look forward to your application and welcoming you to our community of Reviewing Editors!

At Springer Nature, our goal is to provide reviewers with the support and resources they need to make their experience in the role as smooth, straightforward, and stress-free as possible. 

Core Resources: As a part of the onboarding process, all reviewers receive a set of core resources that are designed to guide them through the peer review process. From step-by-step pre‑submission checklists, to official best-practice protocols, these documents are valuable references at every stage of the program. 

Training Resources: Reviewers at Springer Nature also currently have two essential training pathways to follow: Editorial Academy and Nature Masterclass. The Springer Nature Editorial Academy is our new training platform which hosts many of our primary courses. We also offer a highly recommended standalone course through Nature Masterclass. Focus on Peer Review covers the fundamentals of peer review 

Explore the links below to familiarize yourself with the resources provided to Reviewing Editors: 

Discover more in the Research Communities' Publishing Toolkit here.