Medical Teacher

Follow MedTeachJournal on Twitter 

Guidelines for Reviewers

Medical Teacher

Interested in reviewing for Medical Teacher?

With the number of submissions to the journal steadily rising, there is a corresponding need to recruit more reviewers, and each paper sent out for review goes to at least three reviewers. In addition, there is a constant need to ensure breadth and balance of knowledge and expertise in our pool of reviewers, in order to provide our contributors with fair, detailed and constructive criticism and advice. Moreover, new reviewers help the journal to keep abreast of new developments and the ever changing diversity of new ideas and practices in medical education.

If you are interested in reviewing for Medical Teacher, email us at the Medical Teacher Editorial Office outlining your main areas of expertise and interest and we will get back to you.


General information

Medical Teacher, published twelve times a year, is a journal designed for the practising medical and healthcare professions teacher. It is read in over 70 countries throughout the world not just by teachers but by students, administrators and researchers. In addition to a number of regular features, the journal publishes a wide range of articles which fall into various categories: research papers, reviews, case studies, reports of innovations and ‘how to do it’ papers. Medical Teacher publishes papers relating to the continuum of education, from basic undergraduate education through postgraduate and specialist training to continuing professional development.

Articles should normally be between 2000-4000 words, and short communications not more than 1700 words. All papers submitted must have an abstract of up to 200 words. The referencing system used Taylor and Francis Standard CSE.

Back to Top

Editorial Policy

The Board makes decisions based on the recommendations of two or three reviewers. Further opinion may be sought if reviews are inconclusive, or if additional input is required (eg statistical analysis). Very few articles are accepted without any revisions. Reviewers who recommend revisions may ask to see the revised paper when resubmitted if they wish. All reviews transmitted to authors are anonymous unless the reviewer specifically asks for his/her identity to be disclosed.

Back to Top

Format of the Review

There is no standard proforma to be completed, and reviewers are asked to submit a review in two parts:

Part 1: For use by the Editorial Office and not for transmission to the author(s). The comments should be such that they enable the Editorial Office to make an informed decision. A recommendation as to the outcome of the paper should be given (do not include this in the field for transmission to the author).

Part 2: For transmission to the author(s). This part should be self-contained, and should include constructive feedback on how the paper could be improved, if appropriate. Do not include your recomendation to the editor as to the outcome of the paper in this field. Please note that you will not be able to submit your review if no text is entered into this field.

Back to Top

Reviewers are asked to take the following points into account:

Appropriateness of the topic and contribution to the literature:

Please comment on whether the article likely to be of interest to readers of Medical Teacher, and whether it identifies issues of topical interest. Does the paper advance understanding of the topic, and does it contribute new knowledge to what is already known?

Back to Top

Style and content of paper:

Is the paper well-written, logically structured and with a minimum of grammatical errors? Is the summary appropriately constructed and does it reflect the content of the article including methods used (if appropriate), results and conclusions?

Is the length appropriate for the type of article? Is the literature covered adequately, are the references in the correct format for the journal? If figures and tables are presented, are these clear and logical, with figures well drawn?

Back to Top

In addition, if the article under review is a research paper:

Is the design of the study appropriate with the methods adequately explained? Are the conclusions drawn supported by the results?

Back to Top


Which option do you recommend?

  • Accept without revision?
  • Minor revisions then accept (please indicate revisions needed)
  • Major revisions required before further consideration (please indicate revisions needed)
  • Reject

If you recommend publication either with or without minor revisions, please indicate the priority you would allocate to its publication, based on topicality, quality and appropriateness for Medical Teacher: very high; high; medium; low.

Back to Top

Please remember to save often

ScholarOne Manuscripts gives users a Session Timed Out error after 3 hours with no activity. If your session times out and you have not saved a draft, your work will not be saved. When working on a review, use the Save as Draft button to save your work. You can also create your comments offline in a text editor and Copy/Paste or attach the file to your Reviewer Score Sheet.

The system will give you a yellow warning box 10 minutes before logging you out. If you are experiencing a logout issue, it may be due to the time limit on your server side. If it is less than 3 hours, there is nothing that ScholarOne can do to override that time.

Back to Top


Reviewer Resources


amee logo