Editors Guidelines
Editors at JLCE uphold standards for methodological rigor and public health relevance.
These guidelines outline responsibilities and workflows for efficient decisions.
Editorial duties
Scope assessment
Confirm alignment with lung cancer epidemiology.
Reviewer selection
Invite reviewers with appropriate expertise.
Decision quality
Provide clear, evidence based decision letters.
Ethics oversight
Escalate integrity concerns to the editorial office.
Timeline management
Monitor review progress and send reminders.
Revision checks
Verify author responses address reviewer comments.
How to evaluate submissions
Methodological rigor
Prioritize sound study design and analysis.
Transparency
Ensure data availability and reporting clarity.
Public health relevance
Assess policy or prevention implications.
Balanced requests
Avoid unnecessary experiments or scope drift.
Respectful tone
Keep communications professional and constructive.
Statistical review
Recommend statistical review when needed.
Handling revisions and appeals
Provide focused revision requests that clearly identify must address issues. Use the response letter to confirm changes are complete.
Appeals should be evaluated objectively and may require additional reviewer input when warranted.
Handling revisions and appeals
Focus revision requests on changes that materially affect validity or interpretation.
When reviewer comments conflict, guide authors on which issues are critical for acceptance.
Appeals should be assessed objectively and may require additional reviewer input.
Expectations for editors
Response times
Acknowledge editorial office messages promptly.
Reviewer reminders
Send reminders when reviews are overdue.
Tone
Maintain respectful, constructive communication with authors.
Decision clarity
Summarize key rationale in decision letters.
Escalation
Notify the office of ethics or misconduct concerns quickly.
Documentation
Record decisions and rationale in the editorial system.
Selecting the right reviewers
Prioritize reviewers with epidemiology methods expertise and familiarity with population datasets.
Consider adding statistical reviewers when analyses are complex or novel.
Signals that strengthen recommendations
Methods rigor
Study design aligns with the research question and epidemiology standards.
Data completeness
Population denominators and follow up details are clearly reported.
Interpretation
Conclusions match the evidence and acknowledge limitations.
Policy relevance
Findings connect to prevention, screening, or equity implications.
Clarity for authors
Use standardized decision templates so authors can interpret outcomes clearly.
When recommending rejection, summarize the main methodological issues concisely.
Join the JLCE Editorial Community
Contribute expertise that strengthens epidemiology reporting and peer review integrity.
