Skip to main content

Reviewer Guidelines

BJR|case reports is an open-access, online-only case report journal published by the British Institute of Radiology. Articles included in BJR|case reports cover all aspects of radiology, radiotherapy and the related sciences, including diagnostic radiology, radiotherapy, oncology, nuclear medicine, ultrasound, radiation physics and radiation protection.

BJR|case reports operates a double-blind peer-review process and articles accepted for publication in BJR|case reports should be of high quality and educational value.

Our reviewers play a key role in ensuring the quality of our content. We look to our reviewers for subject-specific knowledge, constructive feedback and an unbiased assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. Language and grammar will be addressed by our production department so we ask that reviewers only draw attention to these areas if they prevent the article from being easily understood.

Please find below some guidelines to help you through the review process.

Before agreeing to review

As an invited reviewer we ask that you:

  • Respond to our invitation to review within a week. If you cannot do the review, please inform the editorial office ([email protected]) as soon as possible.
  • Inform us if you do not feel you have appropriate subject expertise to review the whole paper.
  • Only agree to review a manuscript if you think you can return your feedback within the 10-day time frame. If you need a slight extension please inform the editorial office by replying to the invitation or contacting [email protected] as soon as possible and we would be happy to discuss.

During review

Your review should be constructive, detailing general points on the novelty and interest of the work and its educational value, as well as specific points for improvement to instruct the authors on how they can improve their paper to the point where it may be accepted.

A negative review should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that rejected authors can understand the basis for the decision and see in broad terms what needs to be done to improve the manuscript for publication elsewhere.

BJR|case reports reviews are typically two paragraphs or more.

Please inform us if, upon accepting our invitation and reading the paper in full, you do not feel you have appropriate subject expertise to review the paper.

BJR|case reports publishes the following article types: Case reports, Case reviews and Technical notes. Your invitation letter should state what article type the relevant paper is, please make sure that your comments are appropriate for this article type, e.g. Case reports are short articles describing an isolated case and should not be assessed to the same criteria as Case reviews.

The following is some guidance covering different article sections:

Title and Summary

Do these clearly and succinctly describe the paper?

Main text

Referees are asked to focus on questions of content rather than questions of style, such as:

  • Is this paper interesting and novel?
  • Have any limitations been adequately addressed by the authors?
  • Has enough background been provided in the paper?
  • Is the reference section representative of the field (N.B. reference list should be representative, not exhaustive)?
  • Are the conclusions drawn consistent with the results obtained/evidence provided?
  • If the manuscript is unacceptable in its current form is it promising enough to consider further work and resubmission? In these cases, please recommend "reject and allow resubmission".


Are the images of appropriate clarity for understanding the work? Are there sufficient images and are they appropriate for the paper?


Is a statistics review needed? If so, please state this clearly in your feedback.


Are there any ethical concerns with this paper? Do the authors need to include institutional ethical approval statements/information regarding the use of human or animal subjects?


Does the paper require language editing? Please be sensitive to the difficulties some authors experience when writing a paper in their non-native language and phrase your feedback and recommendations appropriately. If the language used in the paper makes it difficult to understand the work and what has been done, please comment on this.

Suggested references

Any additional references you suggest must be based only on valid academic or technological reasons Please note confidential comments to the editor are welcome and should be written in the "Confidential comments to Editor" box when submitting your review.

Reviewer rewards

All BJR|case reports reviewers now receive a yearly certificate detailing their work as a BJR|case reports reviewer in the previous year.

In addition, we offer a £20 BIR voucher to all reviewers successfully completing a review for BJR|case reports on time.

The voucher will be valid for two years and can be redeemed in one of three ways:

  • Set against the purchase price of a BIR Book - for a BIR member this would be the discounted price.

    You can buy your book online or over the phone (+44 (0) 20 3668 234). To use your discount online please contact [email protected] with the manuscript number of the paper you reviewed to receive your discount code.

  • Set against the cost of a BIR meeting.
  • For a non-member, reduction in the cost of the first year's subscription on becoming a BIR member. Details on becoming a BIR member

Please note:

  • Only one voucher applies per manuscript and vouchers for reviews of revised manuscripts may only be redeemed if the reviewer has not already reviewed a previous version of the paper.
  • Only one voucher may be used per transaction and the voucher has no cash value.
  • The voucher is not transferable and cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer.
  • The scheme will be reviewed after 12 months and, subject to usage, cost and feedback from reviewers, further flexibility in the conditions may be introduced.