JAA seeks editors with expertise in antioxidant science, oxidative stress biology, and related disciplines. Editors should have a strong publication record and experience in peer review.

• Doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience
• Active research program in antioxidant biology
• Peer review experience for scholarly journals
• Commitment to timely editorial decisions
• Ability to assess assay validity and reproducibility

• Current CV with publication list
• Brief statement of expertise and interests
• Examples of recent antioxidant research
• Contact information and institutional affiliation

Applications are reviewed by the Editor in Chief and editorial board. Qualified candidates are contacted for confirmation and onboarding.

Editors typically manage four to six manuscripts per year. Time commitment averages two to four hours per manuscript, including reviewer coordination and decision preparation.

JAA is committed to rigorous, transparent publishing in antioxidant science. We emphasize reproducible methods, complete data statements, and ethical compliance across all article types.

The editorial office supports authors, editors, and reviewers with clear guidance and responsive communication. For questions about scope or workflow, contact [email protected].

We encourage continuous improvement in reporting practices and share updates that help the community maintain high standards in antioxidant research.

Clearly report antioxidant assay standards, controls, and calibration methods for transparency.

Provide validation evidence or benchmark comparisons to show assay performance and reliability.

Describe data sources and preprocessing steps so other researchers can reproduce results.

Clarify how oxidative stress markers were selected and interpreted in the study context.

Use consistent notation and define acronyms at first use to improve clarity for interdisciplinary audiences.

If code or data sharing is restricted, describe access limitations and provide detailed methods.

Summarize how results support clinical or nutritional relevance without overstating conclusions.

Describe assay controls and reference standards to support reproducibility.

Explain how sample variability and batch effects were managed in analysis.

If antioxidants are compared, describe the criteria used to rank or prioritize compounds.

Highlight any bioavailability or metabolism considerations that affect interpretation.

Report whether results are based on in vitro, animal, or human evidence to prevent overgeneralization.

Note any limitations related to sample size or study duration that could influence conclusions.

Include a brief statement on data access or supplementary materials provided.

Report the main antioxidant assay or outcome measure used in your study to clarify the evidence base.